The first must-see film of the year.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

I get there is a craze with the Anabelle franchise as well as ghost hunting shows, so it's not a surprise someone would have thought to create a show about discussing possessed or haunted items. This haunted object premise COULD be cool if proof of the object's history was shown and discussed. Not hard, they did it all the time on Ghost Adventures.Next, the butler named Theodore who brings Zak his mail. The segment really had nothing to do with the haunted object but rather a way for Zak to introduce the fact he now has a butler. The set...and this is definitely a set has 4 rooms? Why does he need a butler? The feel of the show is just OVERLY dramatic and the ego-mania is stifling. If Zak and his crew wanted to explore haunted and cursed antiquities that have apparently killed people, I don't think it's wise to have guests of the show drag the object out into public where it can be in contact with unsuspecting people. It's kind of a reckless thing to do if one TRULY believes these objects are possessed. This is the neglected detail that sinks the show's credibility for me. I'm no expert but I would imagine that an experienced ghost hunter would want to retrieve and transport the object themselves knowing how dangerous it can be to unsuspecting people. If the host got off his throne and retrieved these demonic items from their place of origin it would inspire actual ghostly events to occur as well as lend itself to better storytelling. Ghost Adventures was such a hit because of its casts honest chemistry and the playful rhythm that made it authentic and relatable even if you didn't believe in ghosts. They joked, they screamed and most importantly they had fun and that's why it was so fun to watch. In conclusion, no I'm would not watch another hour of Zak desperately trying to get people to take him as seriously as he does himself which is the only creepy element of the show.

I always knew Zak was egotistical, but this show takes the case. After his "butler" checks the peep hole after someone knocks, they must walk down a long, dimly lily hallway where Zak is sitting on his "throne" and doesn't stand when a person enters, not even if it's a woman. Zak's Ghost Adventures is a ten compared to this show, but that's another review. It's just a cheesy show, with a slow moving butler, an interview room that looks like it came off of the set of a vampire movie and a gaudy hearse as his official museum car. He needs to bring his ego down a few notches and infuse the show with some authentic investigating. I was really expecting A LOT more from Bagans and am truly disappointed.

I like Ghost Adventures, even though Nick is gone and Zak has become increasingly given to pontificating and wearing art school clothing (black on black and thick rimmed glasses). That show is still interesting, both in the historical places they visit and the experiences they have. I guess it's not easy coming up with interesting places that are reputed to be haunted on a consistent basis, so they ventured into Aftershocks (which is okay) and Deadly Possessions. This show feels cheap and slapped together, and not authentic, a bit like the Ryan Buell paranormal show with Penn State students. People come in with objects they think are linked with the paranormal, and Zak sits listening, trying to ask overly provocative questions, and even with cuts to dramatic recreations of events, nothing really happens, it's just rather dull storytelling on the whole. If I had watched this show first and had never seen Ghost Adventures, I'd imagine GA must be a boring, hokey show and avoid watching it. It's a poor effort, and fails primarily because it has a premise that is hard to make interesting and believable. I don't know, what does a ghost hunter do in his spare time? Is it possible to make staying at home and talking to average people with objects they think might be bad interesting and worth watching? Not in this case, unfortunately.

I had high hopes for this show. I have always been a huge fan of Ghost Adventures and was happy to hear of a new series during GA's "off- season" to tide me over until a new season starts. I was immediately turned-off by the fact that Zak has to sit like a king on a throne while the guests bring "object" into his "ballroom." We all know he is an ego-maniac, but come ON, now. The guests stand until he asks them to have a seat. After giving a sketchy history of the item's past (with frequent interruptions by Zak) the "investigation" (for lack of a better term) begins. We see a shot of Zak's self-portrait hanging on the wall. Yes, it is an actual painting of himself. The "investigation" includes someone who has been affected personally by the object. I feel these particular guests had to attend an acting class to be included. This was so over-the-top and unnecessary! And he even has an elderly butler named Theodore who mills around to do Zak's bidding. At one point, Theodore walks up to Zak's throne to deliver his mail, turns around and lets out a scream of feigned terror when he sees the haunted doll. It was so bad. So bad. It is painfully obvious that this was Zak's brain-child and that he has full creative-control over the entire process. I was cringing the whole way through. If you want a laugh, then this show is for you. If you were hoping for an entertaining paranormal show, this won't satisfy.