Hunt for the Skinwalker Review

a reply to: TobyFlenderson

I think if you are not familiar with skinwalker film then it might be worth watching for you.

If you are familiar with skinwalker , then there really isnt much revealed that hasnt been revealed before or diwcussed in public.

I wish less time was spent on the word of mouth interviews, and assumptions and more on scientific tests and results. However it sounds like scientific wise their really isnt anything to report.

I wouldnt be surprised if this is just a kickoff film for hype for building a skinwalker entertainment empire? Perhaps a future bed and breakfast place is in the works ?

Sadly i dont think there is going to be any real science performed on the property and released to the public,. Instead we are likely going to get more of the same hype and undocumented or non evidence based assumptions and word of mouth.

To be fair it has got to suck to spend time,energy, and money on such an endeavor and not be able to provide anything new or evidence of anything by the end. Hence , i can see why these documentaries always end up with word of mouth hype, and speculations versus science based results.

a reply to: JeremyCorbell

So my friend buys the movie and I watch it at his house and now I'm guilty of robbing independent film directors? Sheesh, shame on you for assuming that getting something for free means it's stolen. You should buy me a gift as an apology.

originally posted by: scojak
a reply to: JeremyCorbell

So my friend buys the movie and I watch it at his house and now I'm guilty of robbing independent film directors? Sheesh, shame on you for assuming that getting something for free means it's stolen. You should buy me a gift as an apology.

Ignore the guy. You did nothing wrong.

Having read his comment I wish now that I hadn't patronized him.

What an appalling thing to say to you.

a reply to: Creep Thumper

Lol, I really didn't pay any mind to his comment other than to point out an idiotic assumption.

If this is the actual Jeremy Corbell, the director of the documentary, I give the film even less credence now than I did before considering he has shown an affinity to assume facts when no evidence has been presented.

a reply to: scojak

He shouldn't be complaining about people watching his video for free. He has his own skeletons.

The film wasn't that good anyway.

was looking forward to this, but after this most likely honest review and the director's charmless interaction with this thread, i think i'll wait till it pops up on youtube.

Just spotted this thread and saw my name mentioned re giving a bad review - but that's only half the story...

originally posted by: Rikku
was looking forward to this, but after this most likely honest review and the director's charmless interaction with this thread, i think i'll wait till it pops up on youtube.

Depends on what you expect from the film. There really seems to be two ways to rate it.

For anyone very familiar with the book and hoping for fresh NIDS evidence never seen before - rather than new witness accounts and info regarding AATIP - then I'd give it 5/10.

For relative noobs to the case with zero expectations stoked by marketing and trailers, then 9/10.

Corbell has a very distinct method of filmmaking - a thoughtful, patient, almost dream-like quality rather than "DA-DA-DARRRRRRRR!!!!" It defines all his work in the 'Extraordinary Beliefs' series. I sometimes want to kick it up the ass to move things along, but this film is a worthy addition.

In other words, be wary of what you wish for, evidence-wise, and it'll likely be a fun watch.

PS: As George Knapp confirmed to me in the recent AMA, the period of investigation by BAASS rather than NIDS is what provided Bigelow with the evidence he sought to confirm an ET presence on Earth.

Whether we ever see a film about THAT era (from 2007), I wouldn't hold my breath. Dammit.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

My wife was not aware of the ranch and watched it with me. She was as disappointed as I was. She basically thought we spent $15 to watch a YouTube video and I agreed. Of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I'm sure others will disagree.

As for your comments about his filmmaking style, I couldn't disagree more. Again, it's personal taste, but I found many of his artistic choices immature and uninspired. I've also never seen a filmmaker appear more in a "documentary" than here. I know that this won't be a popular opinion on this site but the entire campfire scene was useless and uninformative. I will never understand the chalk board scenes or the digging through boxes. The movie was as much about making the movie as it was about the ranch.

The only people I can really see enjoying this movie are the fanboys.

Watched it a few weeks ago, a couple of questions to Jeremy Corbell- here's what stand out for me:

What was the mini-mirror image theme on some of the sections of your documentary about, the graphics on top and the bottom of the frame, sort of inverse mirror images?

Why was the interview with the new owner framed sitting between two similar beds wearing all black behind a window? Again, mirror image... that was a real head scratcher, I thought to myself- there must be a reason for that. Why not just a silhouette shot in an office, a dimly lit library or just a plain backdrop?

originally posted by: TobyFlenderson
a reply to: Athetos

George Knapp plays heavily in the film and much of the footage and interviews were his and were done years ago. I have nothing negative to say about him or Bigelow (who barely appears in the movie). It's just that its a rehash of all the stories you've probably already heard. I think some of the stuff is credible just unverifiable. My complaint is that the movie added nothing even though it could have.

I have no idea what all this is about, i looked around a bit and there is a gazillion pages to read, which i can't. So at least for me, if i want to know what this is all about, a movie that summarizes it is nice

Maybe people like me are the intended audience