'Hunt For The Skinwalker' documentary (Jeremy K. L. Corbell, 2018) - Your Verdicts

originally posted by: ConfusedBrit

originally posted by: Baablacksheep
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Sounds almost boring .

Depends on a viewer's motivation for watching, Baa - that needs to be stressed.

For the uninitiated, it will be a fun, evidence-free (beyond mere stories) ride for 2 hrs 10 mins.

For EVERYBODY, the first half-hour is pretty kick-ass as a subtle build-up... until, as I said, it becomes clear this is not a platform for game-changing new evidence, at which point minds may start wandering for veterans of the topic.

Overall, though, for many ATSers...

Thanks CB. I might get to watch it eventually, but cant say am quivering in excitement :/

Mysterious Universe podcast had an episode recently about it. I didn’t read the book, and will watch the film, eventually.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Where is it you are viewing this...other than the trailer?

originally posted by: The GUT


With Jeremy's widely-acknowedged facility for polished & savvy productions I would proffer that we can mark off "a complete lack of self-awareness of what viewers would think and expect." How disappointing to hear. Not surprised though.

To be fair, that criticism mainly relates to the now infamous(?) CCTV shot of materialising twin towers - used in the trailer for a definite reaction and talking-point pending the main release. And it did. Corbell knows that full well, but fails to comment, which does nothing but ring alarm bells.

That NIDS compared it to the WTC (their only comment via George) leads to potentially intriguing questions about the alleged Trickster's sick sense of humour, if you know what I mean - but without further intel and verification, it's a moot point.

With Corbell's obviously sincere interest in phenomenology, I'm sure that being invited into the Team Bigelow/Aviary/Alphabet Soup oeuvre is one helluva ride...if lacking in any legitimate illumination.

Sounds like the To The Stars and Skinwalker operations are starting to come out of the closet and claiming each other as "family" however. As predicted.

Corbell now comes across as a US version of British TV investigator Louis Theroux whose own 'Weird Weekend' episode about UFO enthusiasts was an instant, very funny classic; I urge everyone to watch...


LINK TO FULL SHOW: www.dailymotion.com...

(The empty-suited freaks at the BBC won't even allow YouTube to display a 3-minute trailer, so DailyMotion it is.)




Corbell's "Extraordinary Beliefs" series is a useful gathering of High Strangeness accounts, events and eccentric individuals, offering no firm evidence but a solid library of food for thought, all characterised by a distinctly relaxing, thoughtful presentation, even if peppered by the constant refrain of "I do not have the luxury of disbelief anymore" and the already dated habit of plastering BIG WORDS ON-SCREEN PARROTING/UNDERLINING WHAT IS BEING SAID - time to grow out of that?

Uncle Bob Lazar is next on his radar, but I'll be giving it a pass until part of Amazon or Netflix's viewing schedules. I'm feeling far too deflated, GUT.

I’m still under initiate ATS status (just over a year) and often keep my comments to myself (unless it’s a pharmacy related question, then I’ll lend a voice), but I am honestly excited to watch the film. I started my interest in all things “out there” when I was a child, but didn’t find ATS until the summer of last year (the eyes were opened to a mass of material).

While I feel I’ve read enough about the ranch to take place in a conversation, I’m by no means an expert. I feel watching this documentary will perhaps shed new light on things I didn’t know, and also appease the idea that, finally, some stuff that’s been going on for centuries is coming to light.

originally posted by: Neechavela
I’m still under initiate ATS status (just over a year)

Not sure what that means, Neechavela. A probationary period? Do 100 posts make a difference? I need to re-read T&C etc.

While I feel I’ve read enough about the ranch to take place in a conversation, I’m by no means an expert. I feel watching this documentary will perhaps shed new light on things I didn’t know, and also appease the idea that, finally, some stuff that’s been going on for centuries is coming to light.

It tidily wraps up everything we know so far with a neat bow. Not sure what "new light" will be new to you, though, but by all means go for it as a useful document of a bizarre story without any solid answers whatsoever. As yet.

originally posted by: zatara
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Where is it you are viewing this...other than the trailer?

Well, iTunes for one.

9/11 release date (all the more ironic now, considering the 'twin towers' talking-point - am I missing a joke?)

It's also on Amazon IIRC.

Wait - is nobody else watching this bitch, lol? Am I the official guinea-pig?

Come on, step up, Mirageman - I know you pre-ordered a copy.

originally posted by: ConfusedBrit

originally posted by: Neechavela
I’m still under initiate ATS status (just over a year)

Not sure what that means, Neechavela. A probationary period? Do 100 posts make a difference? I need to re-read T&C etc.

While I feel I’ve read enough about the ranch to take place in a conversation, I’m by no means an expert. I feel watching this documentary will perhaps shed new light on things I didn’t know, and also appease the idea that, finally, some stuff that’s been going on for centuries is coming to light.

It tidily wraps up everything we know so far with a neat bow. Not sure what "new light" will be new to you, though, but by all means go for it as a useful document of a bizarre story without any solid answers whatsoever. As yet.


The “initiate” status was a self-made title lol. I learned quickly that the majority of members here expect/respect quality posts.

wrong thread

originally posted by: humanoidlord
wrong thread

Yeah - the "My Visit..." thread is over there, mate.

I'll pop into that thread myself - my job here is done. Are they serving gin and muffins?

I look forward to others' reviews, but I think the other thread will swallow this one, so to speak.


PS: Thanks to the mods for the unexpected 'Applause' and NOT crucifying me for the hopeless initial OP!

Here's another review, not a kind one, but it makes a lot of good points about this whole thing. All this talk about 'not being able to talk about it' is BS, and although I still have hope that there is something happening at the ranch, there's simply no excuse at this point to keep secrets. The whole legend is starting to look like a a way for people to make money.

We've heard the same thing before about those claiming they have a real knowledge about UFO's, but 'can't talk about it'.

Hunt for the Skinwalker, as a film, is an enjoyable and entertaining two hours, so long as you are amused by old men tilting at windmills. However, as a documentary, it was surprising in its lack of rigor and evidence. Instead, it is a portrait of madness and a commercial for the forthcoming paranormal resort apparently planned for the site. The people involved are the last of the romantics, looking for a world beyond reality, where the fantastic touches the mundane. Just as the Spiritualists and the Evangelicals turned to things unseen as a promise of eternal life, so, too, do the men who haunted Skinwalker Ranch seem to think that by scaring themselves in the dark they will transcend the limits of nature and escape to a world unencumbered by flesh and physics.

www.jasoncolavito.com...

originally posted by: ConfusedBrit

Corbell now comes across as a US version of British TV investigator Louis Theroux whose own 'Weird Weekend' episode about UFO enthusiasts was an instant, very funny classic; I urge everyone to watch...


LINK TO FULL SHOW: www.dailymotion.com...

Watching Weird Weekend now: Fun!!




^^^Wow...Col. John B. Alexander really gets around!!^^^

Uncle Bob Lazar is next on his radar, but I'll be giving it a pass until part of Amazon or Netflix's viewing schedules. I'm feeling far too deflated, GUT.

Some would assert that feeling ultimately deflated is the unstated goal. I don't believe that, however. Feeling deflated is just the by-product of digging through the crap of our ubiquitous cast of characters (and some of the other noted "ufologists" to be fair.) They've been mucking up ufology/phenomenology for decades now. I wasted a lot of time giving these cats, er birds I mean, the benefit of the doubt and chasing their "leads." It's rather unfair to sincere truth seekers and one of the reasons that I'm as hard as I am when their names (and games) pop up.

Having said that, I actually concur with some of their theories as regards high strangeness events. One or two of them even have my grudging respect in some ways.

At this point I halfway believe we actually are being conditioned for some variation of the IDH from what I loosely term "Team Bigelow." Meaning that maybe they actually do have some kind of mandate having to do with Disclosure. If so, I personally doubt we can trust their interpretation and would expect their historical affinity for deception to continue to be a part of whatever they're selling.

originally posted by: vlawde

We've heard the same thing before about those claiming they have a real knowledge about UFO's, but 'can't talk about it'.

Indeed, vlawde, indeed...

originally posted by: vlawde

www.jasoncolavito.com...

Thanks vlawde. I found this part of the review relevant as well:

it captures an uncomfortable moment. A few days before the Times story hit, Knapp was teasing that a revelation was about to come out that would change how we view the UFO phenomenon. It seems clear that he knew about the Times story, or something similar, but chose not to tell his viewers or his readers, though he was happy to tease. That makes me uncomfortable. Journalists shouldn’t be hoarders of information, nor should they use access to powerful people to present themselves as insiders who hold secrets for the wealthy that they will not share with the public. If you aren’t allowed to report something, I was taught in journalism school, don’t ask to hear it so you don’t have to lie about it to your audience. It’s a breach of trust.

​But that is apparently not a concern for Knapp, who, in the interviews featured here, comes across as someone who revels in the perceived power he holds as a keeper of Bigelow’s secrets. Knapp says that Bigelow gave him secret information decades ago, but he wasn’t allowed to report it for years.

He admits, basically, to being a liar either of commission or omission for much of his UFO reporting career. In fact, he tells Corbell that he still can’t share all the information and he won’t say why. Given that Bigelow is a key figure that Knapp covers for his TV station, where he regularly fails to disclose any of this, there are some serious ethical concerns that arise from a reporter having a close relationship with his subject and intentionally withholding information about said subject from the audience.

originally posted by: The GUT

^^^Wow...Col. John B. Alexander really gets around!!^^^

Y'know, GUT - that tired old cliche about people spitting coffee onto their keyboard? It really is true!

Cheers! And Grrrrrr. It's everywhere FFS...

At this point I halfway believe we actually are being conditioned for some variation of the IDH from what I loosely term "Team Bigelow." Meaning that maybe they actually do have some kind of mandate having to do with Disclosure. If so, I personally doubt we can trust their interpretation and would expect their historical affinity for deception to continue to be a part of whatever they're selling.

Bigelow says a piece to camera in the doc - albeit not new footage - banging on about the Phenomenon's cheeky tactics fooling everyone, and Kelleher at least sets out his IDH stall during Knapp's 2002 docu, propped up by a beaming Eric Davis sporting a rather shabby moustache.

Eric really needs some useful 'tache tips from the far more debonair Mr Bige.



PS: One quibble in the other review linked above - Knapp has pointed out in radio interviews that he agreed the NYT was a better, more serious springboard for the December story rather than breaking it himself, 'the kooky UFO guy' (or words to that effect). I kinda respect that, if true.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

The most hair-pulling moment was the inclusion of the two buildings materialising on CCTV - George confirms NIDS thought them reminiscent of 9/11... and... and... annnnnnnnnnd.... and NOTHING.

so thats why they released it today?
i always found the date to specific to be a coincidence

Did anyone that preordered have any comments/reviews on the extras?

Did anyone that preordered have any comments/reviews on the extras?

originally posted by: vlawde
Did anyone that preordered have any comments/reviews on the extras?

I looked over on Amazon. You have to buy it. You can't rent it.

There were three reviews when I looked. One mentioned the bonus features were inaccessible.

Sounds like there’s some issues with the doc.
Will give it a week and stream it from popcorn time or cafe movie.

I’m so bored at work right now, that I’m almost willing to buy it.
But my fellow like minded gents on ATS say it’s not worth the $12. So that’s saying something.
Very unfortunate though. Was really looking forward to this.

originally posted by: The GUT
At this point I halfway believe we actually are being conditioned for some variation of the IDH from what I loosely term "Team Bigelow." Meaning that maybe they actually do have some kind of mandate having to do with Disclosure. If so, I personally doubt we can trust their interpretation and would expect their historical affinity for deception to continue to be a part of whatever they're selling.

That's a non-novel, pseudo-argument, The Gut!

Summary: No matter what TTSA does, no matter how [potentially] important their efforts may be, it's all crap. Why?

Because The Gut doesn't trust their 'interpretations'.

Which, of course, is The Gut's interpretation.

See how that works?