Joel Reitzloff
I had nothing but bad, yet professional, things to say about this show. and my review somehow was removed. i find it very interesting as i was the harshest critic by far and yet didn't sweat or call names or anything.love, hardcore believer who is disgusted with the way you make the phenomenon look.my review doesn't not contain ten lines show is terrbile world better place without it there isn't much else to say. i put a lot of effort into my last review and it was removed. wouldn't be surprised if the show has the ability to remove posts from its page but who knows
driller703
I love the show. The audio tracks are fine. The subjects are well chosen. The shows are well done, and the cast is great. The problem I have is the extremely distracting photography. I cannot fathom why any such technique would purposely be utilized in a show containing serious subject matter. The camera goes in and out of focus, and randomly zooms in and out. It shakes all around, and there is sometimes static on the screen. I could go on and on. I, as many others do, take this subject seriously. It is a shame that the video is so terribly distracting. Either hire a competent cameraman, or fire the Director of Photography.Stephen J Brown DDS, JD Harrisonburg, VA
Terry Rhodes
I have tried to give UFO Hunters a chance, but the producers aren't on my side. The premise of investigation is interesting, and the incidents investigated are intriguing, but too much time is wasted on shaky, vertigo inducing, extreme zoom shots of vehicles and scenery. I understand that the hand held camera is considered the way to shoot television nowadays, but my twelve year old son could be a better cinematographer than this. Often, whenever something truly interesting is shown, it is on screen for mere seconds, or is blurred. The underground base episode, for instance, went on for most of an hour about the layout of the alleged base, and when maps were provided, they were on screen for 3 seconds (I timed it). I guess if the show were more visually appealing instead of a visual assault on the senses I would be able to continue watching it. This show epitomizes the difference between reality TV and documentary TV, the difference between sensationalism and journalism.
merklekranz
First, "U.F.O. Hunters" is slightly better than another series by "The History Channel" called "Monster Quest". Although both documentaries appear to be chasing smoke, the experiments by John Tindall elevate "U.F.O. Hunters" to slightly above average. The various episodes are a hit or miss affair, with "Invasion Texas 2008" the most recent report. Although a believer - skeptic balance is presented, Bill Birnes of "U.F.O. Magazine" comes across as insincere, trying to defend an indefensible position. If you enjoy "fringe science", quirky characters, questionable research, biased investigations, and searching old "crash sites", this is for you. - MERK
