Area 51: Alien Interview Special Edition DVD

I notice that there is a special edition DVD version of alleged interview of a EBE at Area 51 brought to our attention by the mysterious "Victor". It has the footage digitally remastered, plus an exclusive interview with "Victor".
Just wondered if anyone had actually bought this DVD and if so was there anything else worthy of comment from it....

bought it?
a fool and their money are easily parted tbh
I don't even watch this puppet show on youtube anymore.

Originally posted by dalek
bought it?
a fool and their money are easily parted tbh
I don't even watch this puppet show on youtube anymore.

A puppet? Do you have proof that it is a puppet? I don't think you do so if you want to state your opinion that's fine, but please stop with passing of ignorant speculation as fact.

Thanks for the heads up OP.

I haven't watched it but I would like to have a look if the video is sharper then de Youtube version. I assume they included the Coast to Coast AM interview with "Victor". The C2C interview is highly interesting if you haven't heard it. It can be found here:

Coast to Coast AM interview with Victor

This case has never been proven a hoax and nobody has yet to come forward by name claiming responsibility for the video. Notice that the somewhat shallow skeptics jump right in and cry hoax, of course with no arguments or proof to back up their claims.

Highly interesting case if you ask me.



[edit on 26/8/08 by Fastwalker81]

Originally posted by Fastwalker81
A puppet? Do you have proof that it is a puppet? I don't think you do so if you want to state your opinion that's fine, but please stop with passing of ignorant speculation as fact. [/url]

He's not being ignorant and he's not "speculating". It is far more likely the "alien" in the video is nothing but a puppet, as this is what common experience with these videos and the fact that most of this stuff can be faked (read: CGI) tells us.

Since we're at it, I'd say comments unconditionally supporting the clip as a "real space alien being interviewed in a secret base" are more suited to be labeled ignorant.

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Kenan]

Originally posted by Kenan
He's not being ignorant and he's not "speculating".

So he has proof then?

speculation:
1. A conclusion, opinion, or theory reached by conjecture.
2. Reasoning based on inconclusive evidence; conjecture or supposition.

It is far more likely the "alien" in the video is nothing but a puppet, as this is what common experience with these videos and the fact that most of this stuff can be faked (read: CGI) tells us.

Sorry to burst your bubble but this video was released in 1996, and even claimed to be actually shot in 1990. Even if it was shot in 1996 creating the alien with CGI would be a amazing accomplishment in itself. Furthermore the video was tested and there was no evidence supporting manipulation. So I think your CGI claim is infact the one being unlikely.

And creating such a puppet requires professionals and a good sum of money, let alone operating the thing. And that all for a hoax you never claim. Sure that's indeed also very likely.

Since we're at it, I'd say comments unconditionally supporting the clip as a "real space alien being interviewed in a secret base" are more suited to be labeled ignorant.

Well unless you have some kind of evidence for the video being CGI or a puppet other then it being "more likely" so, the video could just be as real as it could be a hoax.

But we can speculate all day, I was hoping the dvd contains sharper images (read: Evidence).


[edit on 26/8/08 by Fastwalker81]

^^ Ok. it really makes a 'huge' difference for it not being a CGI..then I'll just call it a puppet. Allright?

As for your "prove it" argument..I can't really prove Santa Claus doesn't exist, especially if someone posts on Youtube one drinking beer with his deers and doing a flyby over White House.

In cases like these, we use a common sense and experience which leads us to a conclusion that the video is most likely a hoax, that the chances of it being real are only theoretical.

To simply put it: it's a hoax, BS.

Originally posted by Kenan
^^ Ok. it really makes a 'huge' difference for it not being a CGI..then I'll just call it a puppet. Allright?

If you want to call the alien a puppet that's fine, but do you have any evidence suggesting it is a puppet or is that just your opinion? This is important because if we want to analyse wether the tape is authentic we need to look at the evidence and not draw conclusions based on opinion.

As for your "prove it" argument..I can't really prove Santa Claus doesn't exist, especially if someone posts on Youtube one drinking beer with his deers and doing a flyby over White House.

This has nothing to do with Santa Claus. I can see you are trying to compare him with Aliens, simply because you believe aliens do not exist. Again your opinion regarding aliens is not the point here. My "prove it" argument is about you and another poster claiming the alien is a puppet. As a self proclaimed skeptic you should know that making claims places the burden of proof on you. So in this case you don't have to prove aliens don't exist, you need to prove your claim that the alien in the video is a puppet. Up until now the only argument you can come up with is "common sense" and "most likely" which can hardly be called evidence, let alone proof.

In cases like these, we use a common sense and experience which leads us to a conclusion that the video is most likely a hoax, that the chances of it being real are only theoretical.

No we don't, in cases like these we examine the evidence presented which is in this case is the video and the wistleblower's testemony. I sincerely hope you never have to go to court and the judge says: Well mister Kenan, the evidence suggest you are innocent but my common sense tells me you are guilty. So you are being sentenced to death, goodday.

To simply put it: it's a hoax, BS.

You still haven't presented a single shred of evidence supporting your claim. I'm not holding my breath as you have demonstrated numerous times in this thread alone that you are not interested in any evidence presented. Good luck with your beliefs.

There is a new interview on the DVD as well as the art bell interview

there is lots of info here including a clip of the new interview:
www.area51thealieninterview.com...

I tend to agree that quick to judge only brings quick judgement upon those making the quick judgement.

Who's the more foolish...the fool or the fool who follows him.

The DVD IMO, is at the very least worth having in the collection. True or not, its a nice filler for those times when there's nothing to watch on TV or seen the other movies a hundred times!

Cheers!!!

No we don't, in cases like these we examine the evidence presented which is in this case is the video and the wistleblower's testemony. I sincerely hope you never have to go to court and the judge says: Well mister Kenan, the evidence suggest you are innocent but my common sense tells me you are guilty. So you are being sentenced to death, goodday.

Again, common sense and experience is what matters and it will always be the main guideline ie. tool in determining if some crazy alien video that cannot be 100% proved wrong or right by standard scientific methods, is real or simply fake.

As for the court and judge, you're comparing two completelly different things.
This is the clip posted on Youtube and no man is going to go to jail or be sentenced to death if we assume or speculate the video is genuine or fake.

I can hire Steven Spielberg and his crew to make a 5 minutes clip of ET recorded on a hidden cam, having a dialogue with an Area 51 employee and I'm sure it would look very real, to the extent that no sceptic could provide a single solid proof for the video being faked. And what would that prove?

That unless I don't have a solid proof to back my claim that I should either shut up, join the believers bandwagon or stay openminded? No, no and no.

Unless that alien ends up in mainstream media with scientists testing its DNA and confirming its non-human origin, it's nothing more then an entertaining video with a puppet, filmed in dark, more of it being hidden then actually shown.

There you go.

Originally posted by Kenan
Again, common sense and experience is what matters and it will always be the main guideline ie. tool in determining if some crazy alien video that cannot be 100% proved wrong or right by standard scientific methods, is real or simply fake.

Well that presents us with a simple problem. In this case common sense for you is simply aliens don't exist so the video is fake. Or experience has shown alien and UFO footage was hoaxed in other cases so this case is also a hoax. See the problem here? I'm sure we can agree that this kind of reasoning won't get us nearer to the truth.

I can hire Steven Spielberg and his crew to make a 5 minutes clip of ET recorded on a hidden cam, having a dialogue with an Area 51 employee and I'm sure it would look very real, to the extent that no sceptic could provide a single solid proof for the video being faked. And what would that prove?

Yes you could and no, skeptics could very easily provide proof such a video was faked. For example image analysts would have a field day with the footage, as it would show clear signs of manipulation. If you are all for using common sense and experience you should have known this.

That unless I don't have a solid proof to back my claim that I should either shut up, join the believers bandwagon or stay openminded? No, no and no.

That's entirely up to you. I just find it remarkable that you'd rather assume something is not real based on personal belief then to consider the evidence presented, whatever that evidence might tell you. I don't know about you but I am here to discover the truth, whether it is that aliens are real or not real I don't care.

Unless that alien ends up in mainstream media with scientists testing its DNA and confirming its non-human origin, it's nothing more then an entertaining video with a puppet, filmed in dark, more of it being hidden then actually shown.

If that's your opinion then thats fine but it is just that, your personal opinion. And to get back to the starting point of the discussion, the facts are that your opinion that the video is fake is just as speculative as claiming the video is real and no amount of personal belief is going to change that.


[edit on 27/8/08 by Fastwalker81]

Im hoping the "digitally remastered" edition might be of a quality to give us an added insight into whether it is indeed fake or not.
I wonder if there is more of this video available and held by "victor", however his desire to make money out of it is one of the things that flags up hoax to me, however a mans got to make a living somehow

Originally posted by bmdefiant
Im hoping the "digitally remastered" edition might be of a quality to give us an added insight into whether it is indeed fake or not.

Yes that's exactly what I am getting at. CGI is out of the question so the only plausible explanation if it is a hoax is the puppet theory. If we can get our hands on a high quality version this might give some insight into all of this. For example muscle contraction around the eyes and facial expressions are extremely hard to fake using a puppet. Futhermore this would require alot of money. Some people seem to forget that professional puppets cost a #load of cash.

I wonder if there is more of this video available and held by "victor", however his desire to make money out of it is one of the things that flags up hoax to me, however a mans got to make a living somehow

No this is all the footage he has. And about the money. Lets assume (sry Kenan) for a moment Victor is who he says he is. Now put yourself in his shoes. I personally would have asked money for the footage, as I'm risking my career and possibly my life with releasing the footage. I might as well ask money, instead of handing the footage over and letting the news agency/publisher profit for free while I'm taking all the risks.

But this is just my opinion of course, so maybe other people would have handed the footage over for free.

Originally posted by jon_1983
There is a new interview on the DVD as well as the art bell interview

there is lots of info here including a clip of the new interview:
www.area51thealieninterview.com...

So there is another interview with "Victor". This has made me even more curious.

Great find, thanks for sharing.

I don't think it is CGI since CGI wasn't really perfected until 1993 with Jurassic Park. It would take a company like ILM to create the alien in that video as a realistic CGI.... and that would cost a lot of money.

It could be a puppet or it could be a real alien, or it could be a species from earth that we haven't studied enough of. Either way there is no proof of what exactly it is.

Originally posted by curiousbeliever
I don't think it is CGI since CGI wasn't really perfected until 1993 with Jurassic Park. It would take a company like ILM to create the alien in that video as a realistic CGI.... and that would cost a lot of money.

I agree and the fact that the medics touch the being would be even more difficult to get right using CGI. For example even in the last Starwars movie which relied heavily on CGI they have trouble with scenes where Yoda (complete CGI render) interacts with real people so to speak. And of course back in 1996 this would have cost a huge sum of money.

It could be a puppet or it could be a real alien, or it could be a species from earth that we haven't studied enough of. Either way there is no proof of what exactly it is.

Indeed that's why I'm also hoping the new "Victor" interview gives us additional information. In the C2C interview he displayed exact knowledge of the layout of Area 51 and the S4 facility and was well aware of the transportation methods used to ferry in employees to name a few things.

It's a shame Victor is reluctant to reveal his identity. If he can prove he worked at Area 51 this would lend more credit to his story in my opinion.

Originally posted by Fastwalker81
Well that presents us with a simple problem. In this case common sense for you is simply aliens don't exist so the video is fake.

You're wrong. First of all, I never said that aliens do not exist. I am questioning the whole idea of them visiting Earth ie. being around us in this form or another. That's a claim that's yet to be proven, although there are indications of it and as I said, I don't categorically dismiss this possibility but do doubt it and demand more evidence.

Yes you could and no, skeptics could very easily provide proof such a video was faked. For example image analysts would have a field day with the footage, as it would show clear signs of manipulation. If you are all for using common sense and experience you should have known this.

Again, you're wrong. Look at this forum. If crappy blurry UFO videos posted here can make 15 pages long threads with all sorts of 'experts' analyzing them, not to mention the Moon and Mars "cities" on even more crappy stills, what do you think would happen if a team of professional FX artists would make a video and post it on the Youtube?

That video doesn't have to be super clear to the extent of being perfect, it can be blurred on purpose but yet, made in sucha way that it looks real. And I'm not talking your standard CGI animations of Haiti UFOs etc. Those can be made by Joe average with a proper software and some knowledge.

Bottom line is, everything posted in the form of video CANNOT be trusted or at least, needs a thorough analysis. BTW, many FX profesionalls claim that the Area 51 video is fake and that they would be willing to bet their reputation on it.

Their oppinion based on expertise and experience in this line of work holds more value then some ATS guy wanting to believe in Greys at any cost.

That's entirely up to you. I just find it remarkable that you'd rather assume something is not real based on personal belief then to consider the evidence presented.

What evidence? There is no middle ground, something is either real or fake and unless you have strong evidence to prove me the video and the alien in it is as real as you and me, it is my right to go for my, again, common sense and logic based on everyday experience (read: haven't met any alien in person so far) to claim it's BS.

Simple as that.

And to get back to the starting point of the discussion, the facts are that your opinion that the video is fake is just as speculative as claiming the video is real and no amount of personal belief is going to change that.

You go on speculate if the video is real or not, I'll take my chances and just call it a joke.

If it were CGI, then Industrial, Light and Magic would have been the only ones capable of doing it in the early to mid 90's. There's no amateur that could have done that in CGI without spending a few million in that time period. CGI was still a baby then and VERY expensive. I doubt any hoaxer has that kind of money to pull that off. That also would have been some very good CGI for that period even when you consider what was done with Jurassic Park.

It's either a puppet or it's real. I thought it was real myself until I saw the original Victor interview and that whole thing sounded like a script with some very bad acting to me. Especially the part where they stop filming because he got upset. If he was really as angry as they tried to make it sound, his voice would have had more emotion in it.

I honestly think it's a puppet because of the movement of the head when it started getting sick. Before that point it looked alright.

None of us have the right to shout fake or real when we don't have anything to back up either claim with other than theories.

Just my opinion

[edit on 27-8-2008 by nightmare_david]

Originally posted by Kenan
You're wrong. First of all, I never said that aliens do not exist. I am questioning the whole idea of them visiting Earth ie. being around us in this form or another. That's a claim that's yet to be proven, although there are indications of it and as I said, I don't categorically dismiss this possibility but do doubt it and demand more evidence.

You indeed never said this, I just assumed it and I was wrong apparently. See what can happen when you assume something? The rest of your comment I agree with and I can understand that you demand more proof.

Again, you're wrong. Look at this forum. If crappy blurry UFO videos posted here can make 15 pages long threads with all sorts of 'experts' analyzing them, not to mention the Moon and Mars "cities" on even more crappy stills, what do you think would happen if a team of professional FX artists would make a video and post it on the Youtube?

Correct but I was not talking about ATS "experts". I'm talking about professional image analyst who can analyse footage with professional tools and their expert opinion. This was done with "credible" UFO pictures and video's in the past, and yielded interesting results. A clear fabrication would not last for 5 minutes with these people.

Bottom line is, everything posted in the form of video CANNOT be trusted or at least, needs a thorough analysis.

I agree and the interesting thing is the Alien Interview tape passed the analysis.

BTW, many FX profesionalls claim that the Area 51 video is fake and that they would be willing to bet their reputation on it.

Interesting comment. Care to link me to these claims/testemonies? I'm always interested what experts have to say, especially if there are "many" like you say. And if you are talking about Rick Baker don't bother, I already heard his opinion and he didn't convince me at all.

Their oppinion based on expertise and experience in this line of work holds more value then some ATS guy wanting to believe in Greys at any cost.

I hope you are not refering to me as "some ATS guy wanting to believe in Greys at any cost", because if that's what you think you are sadly mistaken.

What evidence?

The video footage.

There is no middle ground, something is either real or fake and unless you have strong evidence to prove me the video and the alien in it is as real as you and me, it is my right to go for my, again, common sense and logic based on everyday experience (read: haven't met any alien in person so far) to claim it's BS.

Of course I cannot prove the video is real or not, I'm trying to find out by examining the evidence. I'm sorry if that's hard for you to understand. And sure you have every right to call the video BS, just don't pass it of as fact that's all.

You go on speculate if the video is real or not, I'll take my chances and just call it a joke.

Good for you, I'm just trying to get to the truth whatever that truth may be.

Lastly I edited comments about FX artists after being educated by Nightmare_David, thanks for the heads up.


[edit on 27/8/08 by Fastwalker81]

A lot of people in the FX business have puppet experience because a lot of them start off making puppets and models. It's usually the people who make the puppets themselves that go on to operate them.

Didn't the original video have a few FX people? One of which was a puppeteer? I haven't watched the video in a while, but I do remember one guy who was showing how they'd do those movements by using his hand as an example.

Want to make it clear though that I'm not taking Kenan's side here. I don't care for their "it's fake because I say it is" attitude about it with nothing to back that up with.