• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Phenomenon: New From James Fox

Looks like it is available tomorrow. I am going to watch it. I am SO happy this is happening. We need it.
 
Hmmm.. I liked I Know What I Saw a bit better. I thought there was going to be more from current happenings. AND, I don't know why a documentary isn't made that pairs old sightings from the 19th century with their identical counterparts from the 1950s and '60s, etc. Some of those very old sightings are incredibly amazing. If I had more time.
 
Looks like it is available tomorrow. I am going to watch it. I am SO happy this is happening. We need it.
Sympathetically reviewed in today's Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/oct/07/the-phenomenon-ufos-james-fox-documentary

UFOs were probably the first Fortean phenomenon in which I had an interest, when I was around 10 or so. I'm pretty sure that most, pretty much all UFOs have rational, Earth-based explanations, even if we don't know what they are yet. That's my tuppenny's worth!

And having signed up to Amazon Prime* a month or so ago, I'll be watching this.

(* According to the phone calls we regularly get from Asian call centres we've been on Amazon Prime for years and our account will be automatically renewed unless we talk to one of the staff. I do occasionally, to tell them they should be ashamed of themselves. Always cheers me up!)
 
I watched this on Amazon Prime last night. It's well produced and definitely worth watching. I was left feeling that there is definitely a phenomenon, however exactly what it is is uncertain. The craft or objects described seem to exhibit capabilities that might be expected in some form of propulsion like the speculated Alcubierre type of drive (i. e. warping spacetime rather than moving through it in a conventional sense - hence not subject to inertia or relativity). I'm sceptical of the idea that biological entities have visited us but some form of machine of a non-terrestrial origin is plausible. The idea they might seek to neutralise thermonuclear weapons is obviously un derstandable and implies they have a stake in the planet in some way though the evidence of shutting down ICBMs seemed a bit thin.

If I were asked to stake my opinion I'd say there is a genuine phenomenon and governments probably have more information. However they have absolutely no idea of the origin and the secrecy is down to the deep unease that would be felt in the general population with the knowledge that something is capable of these feats but we have no idea what it is.

At any rate I'd say worthy viewing for any Fortean though the £13.49 download fee is a bit steep!
 
I liked it, but it you watched I Know What I Saw, available in full here:
You would notice that almost all of the footage and interviews have been seen before. In fact interestingly, the footage I have posted many times in the past on forums taken in the south in the '50s of the hovering object was included, and that is good as it seems to be real, and he also brought up the case of the landing at White Sands, that can be seen in the Historic Articles thread. Also the interview he had in IKWIS with Evelyn Trent was included again, so that is great. The only thing new was an out of the side of his mouth claim by Reid that we have crashed UFOs. The only nod to the Nimitz and new stuff, was the old (now) footage and a few more interviews with Chris Mellon and Reid. These folks KNOW they are real and are trying to legally communicate that to the public.
I think IKWIS is a masterpiece, and I think the new one is okay --my two cents.
Folks have seen UFOs up close for hours, repeatedly over days. UFOs are under intelligent control. UFOs have been seen for a long time. UFOs have "violated" our airspace and flown circles around our airplanes. UFOs have intentionally interacted with people. They are real. I've seen them.
 
Here is a good section with Arnold and then Evelyn Trent, McMinnville UFO witness on film!:
 
I liked it, but it you watched I Know What I Saw, available in full here:
You would notice that almost all of the footage and interviews have been seen before. In fact interestingly, the footage I have posted many times in the past on forums taken in the south in the '50s of the hovering object was included, and that is good as it seems to be real, and he also brought up the case of the landing at White Sands, that can be seen in the Historic Articles thread. Also the interview he had in IKWIS with Evelyn Trent was included again, so that is great. The only thing new was an out of the side of his mouth claim by Reid that we have crashed UFOs. The only nod to the Nimitz and new stuff, was the old (now) footage and a few more interviews with Chris Mellon and Reid. These folks KNOW they are real and are trying to legally communicate that to the public.
I think IKWIS is a masterpiece, and I think the new one is okay --my two cents.
Folks have seen UFOs up close for hours, repeatedly over days. UFOs are under intelligent control. UFOs have been seen for a long time. UFOs have "violated" our airspace and flown circles around our airplanes. UFOs have intentionally interacted with people. They are real. I've seen them.
Can't argue much with that assessment feinman, the only thing that i'd differ on is that i'd put them neck and neck, and add that they are both well made unpolluted videos that would be ideal starting fodder for any new students of the ETH.

Cheers Buddy.
 
I watched the new one last night, and even as a jaded old fart who has been following the topic for decades, and even though it really doesn't show anything new, I enjoyed watching. It's free of nonsense, crackpots, grifters and sneering know-it-all fundies. That's pretty rare. Of course it helps that I understand I am not part of the target audience. This is a great thing to recommend to someone who is curious and wants to know more about the topic.

I always prefer primary sources, which is why I like reading books on the topic written by the people who did the work of investigating before any of the rest of us had ever heard of a case. That makes seeing and hearing witnesses describe their experiences in their own words, soon after the events, extremely valuable to me. There is a lot of that in this doc. For example, I don't think I had heard Lonnie Zamora describing his encounter in Socorro. His testimony, delivered in calm, matter of fact sentences, blasts away decades worth of bullshit that has pretty well ruined a real understanding of the event without it. It's amazing how much crap has been piled on, in direct contradiction to his description of the encounter.

Fox and Torme have made a reputation for high quality documentaries, and this one is among the best. They seem to have a keen awareness of how such a thing works, and avoid all sorts of common errors, like having a narrator drone on about what the viewer is seeing, as though it's for radio or something. That's a big, annoying turn-off, not to mention a waste of time and resources. None of that here. Speaking or narration, Peter Coyote is really a great choice for something like this.

I'll give it two thumbs up. :twothumbs:
 
Good observations! I certainly enjoyed it and the rest of them, and I am so proud of Fox for making these documentaries! :)
 
Back
Top