An Exercise In Nonsense

Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

I love investigation of mysterious and spooky phenomena. But, if there's not a hint of realism to it, then it puts me off.This show is pure garbage. The back stories are slightly interesting and then, this hokey "psychic" shows up to make it all a big steaming pile of ............ you know.I would put this show into the same category as "Finding Bigfoot", in which everything that makes a noise in the woods is quickly identified as a "SQUATCH!" Hokum.There are a proliferation of shows such as this, so apparently many people are like me and interested in the paranormal. It's a shame there are more quality shows out there. This show does not rate as quality.I won't bother turning this crap on again. It's terrible.

I've watched G.E. many times, hoping for a nice scare. I'm always disappointed. The format consists of sitting a nice Canadian down in a chair in an empty studio and just letting them talk about their "ghostly encounters" which, frankly, seem kind of boring. I think it might be better if they edited the monologues to be shorter, and add more dramatization. Maybe have 3 stories per episode instead of 2, and move things along a little faster. If you've ever seen the show "I Survived", that has a similar format: sitting real people down and letting them talk. But "I Survived" is absolutely riveting compared to "Ghostly Encounters", and doesn't even involve ghosts.

I so agree with your opinion. It is presented very bare bones, with little explanation. Much better than the other voyeuristic ghost hunting shows. Well worth watching. I read some comments from some who believe they have the 'scientific' explanation to what these people experienced, such as with the 'Hag' story. I was thinking also that she probably was experiencing sleep paralysis until she mentioned her roommate telling her about the/a spirit with her telling the roommate. I would not classify myself necessarily a True Believer or nonbeliever. I try to look at the situation with an open but rational mind, not being bound to my world view. I would just say, things are sometimesnot as easily classified and explained as we would like.

I find "Ghostly Encounters" to be very smart television entertainment. The show's producers use an empty, paint-peeling loft space (well lit natural light permitted by by large floor to ceiling windows typical of most loft space) as a setting for the host's narratives and probably also where the sit-down interviews with Ontarians who have had ghostly encounters takes place. The setting is cost-effective for production, and it works for the content. Very smart. In addition to production cost savvy, the program sells itself to viewers by emphasizing content over special effects or other "boogy boogy" factors that make other programs of the same genre unbearably boring. The program's producers seem to be able to locate credible Ontarians who are willing to go on air and tell the story of their experiences in a credible, rational manner. The producers seem to be very effective in screening out "experiencers" who may have psychological problems. I've only seen one story teller(experiencer) on "Ghostly Encounters" who I thought might have a psychological issue. What's interesting about these experiences, in general, is that rational people have them. And, in this instance, the events are occurring fairly close to home. I actually happen to meet someone in a bank queue who was personally familiar with the haunting prolems people had reported in Vaughn near the Indian burial grounds. That "in Ontario" factor makes the show particularly interesting. "Ghostly Encounters" reports the experiences (whatever make actually be causing them) in an unembellished narative format that is smart in that it counts on the content being unique enough to hold a viewer's interest. It usually is. The host's narrator (Laurecne Chau) puts a very sober and intelligent face on the program. Is it my imagination, or does Laurence Chau's demeanor seem a lot like that of Rod Serling? It's a shame the program doesn't seem to be attracting enough production money to have done more than 2 season's worth of shows. It's refreshing and relaxing entertainment.