Ghost Hunters 2.11: "07 Oct 2005"
Case #1: Winchester Mystery House
Case #2: Queen Mary
Another episode, another whirlwind investigation, another round of disappointment. It’s not that I expect much to happen at the more “infamous” sites, because I had my serious doubts, but I’m surprised at how little has been found during the investigations this season. And considering how many more sites are being covered, the overall effect is worse. Sure, most of the time, nothing happens during an investigation. But how can the series stay afloat when the implication is that something will happen?
In this case, however, the TAPS team gets to once again underscore the depth of their integrity. If this were “Most Haunted”, a lot of things from this episode would have been tossed out as perfect evidence of a haunting. The TAPS team was a lot more thorough (which makes it hard to understand why they goof off while reviewing evidence, if they know subtle clues are important).
In fact, I was a little annoyed when Steve took Donna to task for not reviewing the evidence with enough dedication. Who else remembers all those episodes earlier this season, where Brian and Steve were obviously fooling around and not playing attention? I find it more than a little ironic. That said, it was good to see the contrast with Dave Tango, from fooling around to finding evidence of tampering.
First case:
What a waste of time. Here’s where the editing makes it look like a lot more fooling around was being done, because if you pay attention, you can tell that the whole issue was only being discussed for something like 20 minutes. They were really reaching when they tried to play up tension, and it wasn’t working. I think that place is considered haunted more for the atmosphere than the frequency of activity.
Second case:
Well, now, isn’t this interesting? There are a lot of people who claim that Jason and Grant fake everything they catch, and yet here’s something that they would love to see, handed to them on a silver platter. So why didn’t they just accept it? Because that’s not what they’re about, that’s why!
I suspect that the hot little “ghost guide” was the one behind the incident, because whenever she discussed the footage, she would start blinking furiously (tell-tale sign). Also, nearly everything she said was all performance; she was blatantly lying about things and playing at being sensitive. Granted, that may simply be how she was portrayed, but let’s face it: it’s her job to make the ship look super-active. I suspect they brought TAPS in for no other reason than to use them for publicity (and some comments/observations since that investigation apparently bear that out).
I also think it’s odd when people get mad that TAPS won’t call a place “haunted” if they don’t have solid evidence. I’ve always recognized that Jason and Grant are saying that they themselves don’t have the evidence to support that a haunting is taking place. It would be impossible for them to claim, with any credibility, that no haunting is definitively happening. Semantics, of course, are always a source of easy criticism.
Chill Factor: 4/10
Case #2: Queen Mary
Another episode, another whirlwind investigation, another round of disappointment. It’s not that I expect much to happen at the more “infamous” sites, because I had my serious doubts, but I’m surprised at how little has been found during the investigations this season. And considering how many more sites are being covered, the overall effect is worse. Sure, most of the time, nothing happens during an investigation. But how can the series stay afloat when the implication is that something will happen?
In this case, however, the TAPS team gets to once again underscore the depth of their integrity. If this were “Most Haunted”, a lot of things from this episode would have been tossed out as perfect evidence of a haunting. The TAPS team was a lot more thorough (which makes it hard to understand why they goof off while reviewing evidence, if they know subtle clues are important).
In fact, I was a little annoyed when Steve took Donna to task for not reviewing the evidence with enough dedication. Who else remembers all those episodes earlier this season, where Brian and Steve were obviously fooling around and not playing attention? I find it more than a little ironic. That said, it was good to see the contrast with Dave Tango, from fooling around to finding evidence of tampering.
First case:
What a waste of time. Here’s where the editing makes it look like a lot more fooling around was being done, because if you pay attention, you can tell that the whole issue was only being discussed for something like 20 minutes. They were really reaching when they tried to play up tension, and it wasn’t working. I think that place is considered haunted more for the atmosphere than the frequency of activity.
Second case:
Well, now, isn’t this interesting? There are a lot of people who claim that Jason and Grant fake everything they catch, and yet here’s something that they would love to see, handed to them on a silver platter. So why didn’t they just accept it? Because that’s not what they’re about, that’s why!
I suspect that the hot little “ghost guide” was the one behind the incident, because whenever she discussed the footage, she would start blinking furiously (tell-tale sign). Also, nearly everything she said was all performance; she was blatantly lying about things and playing at being sensitive. Granted, that may simply be how she was portrayed, but let’s face it: it’s her job to make the ship look super-active. I suspect they brought TAPS in for no other reason than to use them for publicity (and some comments/observations since that investigation apparently bear that out).
I also think it’s odd when people get mad that TAPS won’t call a place “haunted” if they don’t have solid evidence. I’ve always recognized that Jason and Grant are saying that they themselves don’t have the evidence to support that a haunting is taking place. It would be impossible for them to claim, with any credibility, that no haunting is definitively happening. Semantics, of course, are always a source of easy criticism.
Chill Factor: 4/10
posted by John Keegan | 15:11
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home