Explore the Unexplained
Want a 12-Month Digital Subscription to Paranormal Underground Magazine? Click here & save more than 15%!
Topic RSS
Offline
With the paranormal in the media gaining steam and it being October, we are seeing and hearing about several new shows coming for us to watch. Each has it's merits and it's criticisms from the viewers. So I ask you this: if you could design a paranormal show what would you have in it?
I'd start with having live webcams when the show tapes it's investigations. Don't disclose where it's at, just when it is being done. Second, I'd have a website that has the evidence on it for all to see. Third, have a different group each time. Just use a local team that is deemed qualified by the show and use them for that investigation. Then move on to the next. For example you have an investigation that is going to occur in Norman, Oklahoma. You find a team in Norman Oklahoma that will conduct the investigation and film them doing it. The next week it will be somewhere else, then find another team.
I'll add more as I think of it.
What would you do differently or the same as all the other shows out there?
Offline
I would have 1 skeptic come along for the investigation and then would have he or she interviewed during the reveal and let them tell what they think. Also as Ryan noted have all the evidence up for review on the web site so all can see and make their own judgement.
Offline
With the paranormal in the media gaining steam and it being October, we are seeing and hearing about several new shows coming for us to watch. Each has it's merits and it's criticisms from the viewers. So I ask you this: if you could design a paranormal show what would you have in it?
I'd start with having live webcams when the show tapes it's investigations. Don't disclose where it's at, just when it is being done. Second, I'd have a website that has the evidence on it for all to see. Third, have a different group each time. Just use a local team that is deemed qualified by the show and use them for that investigation. Then move on to the next. For example you have an investigation that is going to occur in Norman, Oklahoma. You find a team in Norman Oklahoma that will conduct the investigation and film them doing it. The next week it will be somewhere else, then find another team.
I'll add more as I think of it.
What would you do differently or the same as all the other shows out there?
I guess for me, that question would best be answered by how you want to focus the show. Do you want to focus on the ghost story? Do you want to focus on science? Are you more about the experience or the proof?
For me, my ideal show (and you will likely see this in the documentary) is one that focuses more on the story and less on the proof. I don't think that we will ever be able to prove anything to anyone – and even if there was absolute proof, there would be those who didn't believe. So, in my happy story-telling world, I would tell the story and use any of the evidence to further the story. Does that mean that I would use any evidence that supports a hypothesis of haunted, no matter how questionable it may be? Nope. I realize there are some places with great stories that aren't haunted. If that was the case, I would tell the story of the place with no supportive evidence. My goal is always to tell a story, to raise questions and to allow people to find the answers themselves. I think that if I did a show, it would be along those lines. Show things from both sides – these are the ways it could be true; these are the ways it could not be true…
One of the things that I see missing on most ghost hunting shows is compassion. That would be the number one element that I would want on a show of my own. Compassion for any spirits who remain. Compassion for the people having terrifying experiences. Respect and connection with the background story of the place. Intimacy with the audience, as far as sharing the honest fears, thoughts, stories and feelings of all of those involved in whatever story was being told.
I think the ideal show is simple, honest, intimate, compassionate, respectful and straight-forward. That extends to the presentation of evidence. I like the idea of a website where evidence can be examined and discussed. I like the thought of interacting with the audience and taking suggestions from the audience and community. I like anything that contributes to transparency.
The only reason I have this all prepared in my head is because these are the types of questions I've had to answer to myself about how we would tell the story of Wellington in our documentary, Avalanche of Spirits.
Offline
I would have really good looking people investigating in the nude
What??? you asked /tongue.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':(' />
Offline
I would have really good looking people investigating in the nude
What??? you asked
/tongue.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':(' />
That would definitely bring in the viewers!
Bow chicka wow wow.
Offline
1. Two teams of two.
2. No camera people.
3. Only fixed cameras throughout site. ( Time and date stamped, with audio, to correlate investigator gathered evidence. )
4. Absolutely no background or " mood" music.
5. No previewing of the site with "hotspot" identification.
Just a few things, I feel, that would make the show credible. It would also make it the
Guiness record holding fastest cancelled show in history! JMHO /blink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' />
Format wise – make it an hour or more – at a minimum 15 minute intro w/ story, 30 minute investigating/hunting, 15 min review. Don't show packing up/setting up/watching the evidence – that just wastes air time.
Offline
Format wise – make it an hour or more – at a minimum 15 minute intro w/ story, 30 minute investigating/hunting, 15 min review. Don't show packing up/setting up/watching the evidence – that just wastes air time.
Bronzino, this is one of my biggest beefs as well. I don't need to see Steve and Tango winding and unwinding cords and setting up cameras and griping about who left the mouse back at the office. Show me the investigation. Show me the reveal. Its why I tuned in.
Offline
Evidence wise for a show, I would like to see some type of investigative robot built.
The robots would have the investigative equipment built inside of them for use, and be able to evaluate and debunk each situation instantaneously.
I would also add motion detectors for the robots, and built in night vision.They would be able to determine where any noise is coming from, and go to the area.
I thought there was some tecknology, to determine if sounds are made by the human voice, animals, etc. If so, the robots would be able to detect this, on evp's right on the spot, or audible sounds. At least rule out what it's not.
I would have the robots have the most current tecknology available.
The robots would be their own camera crew, and we could see everything they see and do.
The people would sit in the van, with the computers that are tied into the robots.
They would explain the investigative evidence and show on the spot analizing of the evidence.
The robots would have to be cute, maybe a R2 D2 look, but mute. /laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
Offline
Evidence wise for a show, I would like to see some type of investigative robot built.
The robots would have the investigative equipment built inside of them for use, and be able to evaluate and debunk each situation instantaneously.
I would also add motion detectors for the robots, and built in night vision.They would be able to determine where any noise is coming from, and go to the area.
I thought there was some tecknology, to determine if sounds are made by the human voice, animals, etc. If so, the robots would be able to detect this, on evp's right on the spot, or audible sounds. At least rule out what it's not.
I would have the robots have the most current tecknology available.
The robots would be their own camera crew, and we could see everything they see and do.
The people would sit in the van, with the computers that are tied into the robots.
They would explain the investigative evidence and show on the spot analizing of the evidence.
The robots would have to be cute, maybe a R2 D2 look, but mute.
/laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
There goes the whole "DUDE RUN" factor! /laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
Offline
Would like to add, show a follow up with how things are going for the person or place that was investigated.
Offline
I have been delaying posting on this one for some time trying to accurately put into words what I think would be a satisfying paranormal investigation show. First off, I think that we should drop the team paradigm. No more black shirts with yellow stenciled alphabet soup. No more car haulers with plasma screen tv's. No more briefing, drive, setup, investigate, pack up, review, reveal formats. No more cheesy half-assed debunking attempts, and on the other side of that coin, no more half-assed experiments in poorly controlled environment passed of as scientific gospel. So now that I have outlined what I don't like, let's see where that takes us as far as a show goes.
I would like to see camera crews follow experienced and cutting edge researchers like Marcus Leader and Lloyd Auerbach. Show them throughout the process of their research. In the case of Marcus Leader, show him in his workshops building his experimental equipment, then in the field doing real experiments. In fact, give him his own show. I would watch religiously. The show may or may not be as exciting as the crap they are passing off as paranormal shows these days, but it would be educational and an accurate representation of the true nature of paranormal research. In the same vein, it would be refreshing to see Mr. Auerbach experimenting and researching as well. Hell, with Lloyd, you wouldn't even need new stuff, his case files could provide many seasons of good paranormal television.
Chronicle the research and development of inventors like Andy Coppock, Bill Chappell, Ron Ricketts, Frank Sumption, and so on. Make a show based on parnormal tech. Sortof like Modern Marvels meets what ghostlab should have been. Chronicle the ITC research of Bill Murphy, Steve Hultay, Rosemary Ellen Guiley. These would be shows worth watching.
As far as revamping the current theme, yet staying within the socially accepted model for ghost shows, just simply try to portray things in a more accurate light. Throw in some daylight investigations, or show the frequency of fraudulent homeowner claims of the paranormal. Do repeat investigations of the same place, so you can more accurately get a feel for the frequency of paranormal activity levels. Chronicle the events "after the investigation" such as effects of long investigative hours on researcher's families and associated stresses. Make mention of unwanted tag-along attachments that can find their way into the investigator's homes, and interview their families to see what they think about their dad/mom/husband/wife's investigation into the paranormal and how it affects the familial unit.
Ok, so that was all over the place, but it would be different….and I am all about seeing something different, lol…
thanks
Andy
Offline
I would like to get this topic rolling again if some new people are interested in throwing in their 2 cents.
Some good ideas already. However, I am not sure about getting all the experts on a new show. My reasoning is that they have all been on TV many times and it is always the same. Nothing new and I think that may be the problem with all the shows today. Nothing new!
I understand what has already been said but what would people like to see that they haven't seen before? Does seeing new equipment, ideas and investigative methods interest people? What about locations other than the popular public sites?
What NEW things would people like to see?
Offline
just off the top of my head, i'd like to see the camera's pointing at the environment instead of the 'stars'. i know what they look like. i want to see the area surrounding them as that's what is being investigated.
"We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of dreams." - Willy Wonka (Gene Wilder)
Offline
just off the top of my head, i'd like to see the camera's pointing at the environment instead of the 'stars'. i know what they look like. i want to see the area surrounding them as that's what is being investigated.
I totally agree with this one. I am also tired of them saying; " Did you see that?"
and me screaming at the TV,
NO!, because the camera is always on you!!!!!
Offline
I would like to see evidence from as many angles as possible say if a door opens I want both sides plus top and bottom shots /smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
Offline
I totally agree with this one. I am also tired of them saying; " Did you see that?"
and me screaming at the TV,
NO!, because the camera is always on you!!!!!
I would like to see evidence from as many angles as possible say if a door opens I want both sides plus top and bottom shots
/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />
As much as I agree with what both of you are saying, I don't think we would see anything, though. /smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
Offline
I would like to see a show on equipment, does it work, or doesn't it.
If it doesn't work why do we use it, would be one of my questions.
Also, what's new in the equipment use field, anything ground breaking.
New ideas would be interesting, seems to be the same old useage of equipment.
Why do we think this type of equipment would catch a ghost, explored.
A show devoted to, what is a ghost or spirit, not so much what they do.
Offline
What I am seeing here and other places I have posted, is that many people are leaning towards a documentary. Maybe not in the strictest sense but close.
Maybe a show that would educate, express ideas, etc. Then maybe employing them later in the show. Instead of just watching a group go through the motions like so many shows already?
Am I getting warmer?
Offline
What I am seeing here and other places I have posted, is that many people are leaning towards a documentary. Maybe not in the strictest sense but close.
Maybe a show that would educate, express ideas, etc. Then maybe employing them later in the show. Instead of just watching a group go through the motions like so many shows already?
Am I getting warmer?
i really don't see why a 'regular' program couldn't educate, express ideas etc. i don't know if it necessarily needs to be a documentary; i hate to think that all the viewing public lacks the intelligence and patience to sit thru 20 minutes of television without someone screaming (usually at a spider or bug), bullying alleged spirits and all the other nonsense going on on the present shows.
do both. we don't need to see the set up/break down ad nauseum. we don't need to hear all about their love lives, what they had for breakfast etc.
why do producers have to try and satisfy the lowest-common denominator?
"We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of dreams." - Willy Wonka (Gene Wilder)
Most Users Ever Online: 151
Currently Online:
11 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
norcalmonkey: 24961
HeidiAnn67: 15116
wrightghost: 8521
duckie7694: 5868
movieman1500: 3314
milomilford: 2589
pooperdooper: 2049
sympathyforthedevil: 1912
BornAware: 1741
ediaz65: 1447
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 3
Members: 2938
Moderators: 3
Admins: 3
Forum Stats:
Groups: 14
Forums: 47
Topics: 1885
Posts: 104918
Newest Members: Johnsrudcraig@yahoo.com, Enverrera
Moderators: NoWhammies (3983), almosthunted (1138), RyanNREMTP (7427)
Administrators: admin (0), MysticalKnight (5526), sithy (1330)
Paranormal Forum - Paranormal Underground