Ghost Hunters International 2.2: "Skeletons in the Closet"

Generally speaking, this episode was a lot less interesting than the premiere, which is not surprising. For all that some “fans” will be shocked that GHI didn’t declare either site “haunted”, they do have a fairly consistent track record. Sites with so little activity during an investigation don’t give the editors much to work with, and it’s obvious when they have to play things up to generate tension.

What I found most interesting in this episode was the revelation that Brandy is only in her mid-20s. I realize that this information is available if I had the interest in looking for it, but until now, I had no concern for her age. But after they mentioned that Ashley is also young in the premiere, this little tidbit of personal data seemed to click.

One thing that initially gave “Ghost Hunters” (and therefore TAPS) some gravitas was the semi-seasoned nature of the team. Jason and Grant, both in their 30s, had been in the field for a while. Some of their fellow team members were older, some a bit younger, but there was a sense that the team had been around the paranormal block enough times to have the benefit of years of experience. It helped to mitigate the concerns over their lack of technical background. (And it doesn’t hurt that I’m the same age.)

In contrast, a lot of the teams with shows these days seem to trend younger, and GHI seems to be following suit. This doesn’t have to be a problem, since a lack of critical thinking is hardly a trait reserved for the young. All too many paranormal investigators suffer from that malady. At the same time, I would be wary of any group with members mostly in their early to mid-20s. Perhaps shows like “Paranormal State” have given me a very poor impression of young investigators.

Case #1: Cesky Krumlov, Bohemia

Why would Eastern Europeans keep their saints sitting around in some closet? It making more sense out of the title, and I’m sure it was the subject of many comments and jokes, but wouldn’t that be the first clue that it’s not actually a saint? I’m surprised no one did any research on that claim.

I’m also a bit leery of the idea of throwing a surprise birthday party in the middle of an investigation, even if it could technically be defended as “reproducing the circumstances of reported activity”. I don’t know about anyone else, but during an investigation, I’m usually worried about the limited time I have to conduct the investigation.

Despite some personal experiences and a couple oddities, there’s really no “evidence” worth talking about for this case. I can’t argue with Robb on his call for this one.

Case #2: Manor House, N. Ireland

The most interesting thing about this case was the auto-focus problem. Not because it was paranormal at all, but because it’s the sort of thing that could easily be touted as paranormal by those with a less critical eye. I would chalk that up to the educational side of the franchise.

This is also a good example of a reveal that leaves the client less than pleased. The client wanted the site to be haunted, without a doubt, and there’s just no reason for GHI to declare it so. I think they handled this situation better than they have in the past, however, and there just wasn’t much for them to say beyond the obvious. Sometimes, that’s all you can do!


Want to comment on this? First, you must log in to your SideReel account!