• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

UFO Hunters: The show(s) schedule(s)

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Michael L.

Michael L.

Coffee swillin' Devil's advocate
According to mass e-mails I have gotten and banners on SciFi.com, their version of UFO Hunters is going to be on tonight (1/30 at 10PM Eastern/9PM Central). They are calling it a "special." It is still not showing on my Dish Network on screen guide.

According to History.com, their version of UFO Hunters is also on tonight at 10PM Eastern/9PM Central. It repeats later in the evening (2AM Eastern/1AM Central). It is listed on the Dish on screen guide.

Both websites lead with an ad for their respective versions. Check'em out:

http://www.history.com
For the History Channel

http://www.scifi.com
For the Sci Fi Channel

These two channels are really going at it with these shows. Let's hope they are worth it. I'll go on record right now stating I have much higher hopes for the History Channel than I do for Sci Fi.
 
They've moved the premiere up a week? Both networks?

Oooh, there's a fight brewing.

Both are showing up in TV Guide online for my cable network.
 
It's so damned weird - two shows, same name, both taking the same approach, does anyone think they're gonna capture a UFO on tape? It's fascinating that the networks feel that there's a demand for this type of programming - bodes well for us, where's OUR show?!? - but I'm not sure that there's enough audience to merit dueling shows. We'll see how this pans out, and hopefully, we'll have Bill Birnes on the Paracast soon to give us the inside scoop on the situation.

dB
 
David Biedny said:
does anyone think they're gonna capture a UFO on tape?
Click to expand...

I said something similar on my blog,

http://spookyparadigm.blogspot.com/2008/01/dueling-ufo-hunter-tv-shows-and-why.html

Personally, I think the SciFi show has a better chance at success. The format has been tested and works. Two main characters, with an emphasis on them being "everyday" people, rather than degreed experts. The Mission Impossible-style rotating cast of investigators that are called in for each case (and importantly, not all male). The use of acronyms (ala the now famous TAPS). By contrast, the History Channel show focuses on four men (no women) who are older, and in the promos at least one of them, the most well known ufologist in the group, is already talking about how they know many of the answers, etc. in a style more suited to the stock-footage/talking head style UFO tv shows that History Channel runs every week. Furthermore, the History Channel show is focusing on historical cases, from decades ago, starting with Maury Island, hitting Socorro, and others.

This is part of the problem both shows will face. First off, while UFOs are hot now, popular interest in ghosts and ghostly matters is much higher, and was before Ghost Hunters ever hit the air. Second, part of the reason people watch ghost hunting shows of any sort is because there is the supposed chance that the camera crew and investigators, skulking around in creepy dark abandoned buildings, could run directly into the ongoing phenomenon. That can be thrilling and engaging. By contrast, ufology is for the most part a forensic study (if proper research is even being done at all), looking for evidence (physical trace, photographs, testimony) to understand a past event, a sighting. Attempts to build up dramatic tension will be much harder.
Click to expand...
 
I watched UFO:Sci Fi (it's easier to change the name for them!) last night; I started a little late (didn't miss anything... thanks DVR!) but basically watched it during the broadcast window. Yeah... I fell asleep. Not only did it have a format similar to Ghost Hunters, it used the same basic design and style. Unfortunately, it has two big disadvantages... make that three. 1) Ghost Hunters goes out looking for paranormal events that are supposedly recurring, so they may actually see something while I didn't get that sense on UFO: Sci Fi. 2) The show seems like a Ghost Hunters episode with a quick side trip to see aliens instead; it is just too similar in camera work, design, etc. to Ghost Hunters. 3) The hook to Ghost Hunters, at least early on, was the fact that the TAPS personnel were interesting. Ghost hunting plumbers? Nice! Add in a spaz assistant and you have a show. That charisma was lacking last night.

I am watching UFO:History right now (again, thanks DVR!). Slicker presentation, awesome design, money spent on stock footage and so much computer animation that I am no longer even sure that Bill Birnes is a real person and not CGI... And it is building a nice narrative. This is a much, much better show.

If you missed the History Channel's UFO Hunters, it is being rebroadcast on Friday. Both shows, according to Dish Network, are on next Wednesday although both are listed as being rebroadcasts of the pilots. Somehow, I doubt that is actually the case.

Based on what I have seen, if you can only catch one then set your dial to the History Channel!
 
I pretty much agree with you, Michael. I surfed between the two (no DVR), until I fell asleep, but stayed with Hist Channel's more. I thought the sameness of "Hunting" formats was a little boring, and I didn't want to invest in learning the personalities of the newbies. I also saw a lot of discussion on SciFi's, and not a lot of "action". I thought the team seemed to be doing more on Hist's show. I'm looking forward to seeing the Hist. Channel show again, so I can see how things ended.
 
David Biedny said:
It's so damned weird - two shows, same name, both taking the same approach, does anyone think they're gonna capture a UFO on tape? It's fascinating that the networks feel that there's a demand for this type of programming - bodes well for us, where's OUR show?!? - but I'm not sure that there's enough audience to merit dueling shows. We'll see how this pans out, and hopefully, we'll have Bill Birnes on the Paracast soon to give us the inside scoop on the situation.

dB
Click to expand...

Also odd that Bill's sidekick on History is the dude who invented gadgets for the Ghost Hunters on Sci Fi
 
I liked the Sci Fi episode better, but time will tell which show will be better. The History Channel's UFO Files can't be beat, so I still bet theirs will pull through. It did strike me funny that all of the characters on both shows (besides Birnes) looked more like model actors, how many UFOlogists look like that LOL.

I think the NJ case they covered is the real deal. I had not seen that video before, but it looked similar to Phoenix lights and the video those 2 girls shot here: http://theparacast.com/forums/seen-this-video-t-1312.html

And the radar data that they recovered is hard to pass off, I would love to see more details on that.
 
I have to admit that I fell asleep watching the show last night. Will give it another shot tonight. I find it "awkward" how in Ghost Hunters and now UFO Hunters they try and establish some sort of "real life" tension and back story during the show—while it's obvious they are trying their best to act out scenarios in a "live" setting. The parts that come to mind are the Roto-rooter scenes in Ghost Hunters and the scene in UFO Hunters where the secretary is sitting at her desk fielding calls while the others are "working". Come on. :P
 
Miah, was the Sci Fi episode better to you because it was a case you were interested in already or was there something else in the show that I just kind of missed? I'm interested, particularly because of your use of italics!
 
The 2nd case covered on the Sci Fi channel was new to me, as was the case that THC covered.

But the THC was covering a very old case, and as you can see nothing came of it. It seemed like a stratch to make a TV show of it.

The Sci Fi case was recent, and there you have many credible witnesses, video, radar showing several objects doing unearthly maneuvers, and possibly a real abduction. That was interesting stuff.

As for the overall shows though, it's too early to tell which will be handled better, which will have better researches, which will end up being worth it's snuff.
 
It seems videos are up: http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=UFO+Hunters&sitesearch=

http://realufos.blogspot.com/2008/01/ufo-hunters-season-premier.html
 
Miah, I do see your point. Although, I thought it was startling that the deceased officer's dogtags were turned over to Kenneth Arnold. I think there is benefit to revisiting some of the UFO "cold cases," but I will grant you that it was not the sexiest case to launch the show!
 
Michael L. said:
Miah, I do see your point. Although, I thought it was startling that the deceased officer's dogtags were turned over to Kenneth Arnold. I think there is benefit to revisiting some of the UFO "cold cases," but I will grant you that it was not the sexiest case to launch the show!
Click to expand...

That was an important find, so much information leading in the right direction, never any proof.

The exciting thing here is that they have a pretty decent budget for investigating things, and considering the show is called UFO HUNTERS, there is no doubt that both shows headed straight to Stephenville TX when that hit the news. Maybe they will come up with something there.
 
Wait, that link must be to the "UFO Hunters" special they played last weekend...the special from UFO Files that helps History lay claim to the title. That wasn't an official episode of the actual show was it?
 
Back
Top