Talk:Area 51: Alien Interview

A few thoughts that may help. I don't know who faked it, or why, but it is surely fake. Robertinventor (talk) 15:05, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Any alien in our solar system has to be way beyond us in capabilities just to get here from another star system
 * It would be a bizarre coincidence to get here just as we develop space technology. Surely if they got here in the 1970s they have been in our solar system at least for millennia, most likely millions, or billions of years given that their civilization could evolve any time in the last more than 10 billion years..
 * They wouldn't need to land to find out about us, they could do it with robotic avatars or nanobots, just need to be a bit ahead of us and they could be invisible to us just as we could be invisible to people from the stone age. But they are most likely millions of years ahead of us by that logic.
 * The story that they destroyed all microbial life on their planet yet survived themselves seems implausible. It seems to be an attempt to explain how they can land here without endangering human life. Also
 * There is no way they would send a mission to Earth that lands and crashes with no other spacecraft in our solar system first. They would not let themselves be captured, or mistreated and would most certainly not let themselves be treated using our medical care by people who for them are like stone age people treating us for our illnesses, and who don't understand their biology. Another spacecraft could likely rescue them in seconds.
 * It doesn't make sense that they would land in person at all. We are very close to being able to make avatars we can use in real time that would be almost like being here, operated from nearby. They could operate them from the Moon or from some kind of hidden spacecraft in LEO if that is possible for them. Why risk your life if you can use an avatar for your first visit
 * Their technology would surely be so advanced their spacecraft just wouldn't crash doing something as simple as landing on a planet - for them a risky voyage might be flying through the outer envelope of a star or visiting the core of a gas giant, not just landing on a terrestrial planet.
 * The US military in practice doesn't retain technology that is of commercial value. We see that with GPS and adaptive optics, they may be at most a decade ahead in some areas. No way they are hiding technology that is millennia ahead and would let them jump millennia ahead of the rest of the world in the commercial sector and win any war in seconds.
 * when imagining aliens then they also design them to be relatable to by humans. Always two eyes, nose and mouth and human like face. Not only that, flat face and nose and mouth positioned like ours, if they looked like a sheep, say, even only that different, we wouldn't be able to read the expressions on their faces. So they have to look sufficiently human for us to be able to read human expressions on their faces. No other animals on Earth are that like us except the great apes, never mind hypothetical aliens

On the prduction quality.
I would run a notice on the production company, Vega 7 Entertainment, and look at the production. I am implying only that that these interviews were purchased and produced for shocking content, not that good production value discredits a claim. (EDIT GOD dammit, I forgot the t=seconds variable, I would consider this overtime if I hadn't used this before EDIT, I did this less than a year ago and the format changed, this is overtime.) Also, to clarify, I don't mean "Expert" as execution, but as an understanding of what needs to be done. Basically, this is not an amateur documentary, it is being sold by people who know how to sell.

1:56 Notice that we've found the narrator here, not the host anymore, adding an extra level of credibility to the host while the narrator speaks coldly and directly and "factually" about a "world no outsider can every truly know except through rumor" Crap, no I'm supposed to be talking about production value. {https://youtu.be/thdzV3VGzwo?t=466 7:46] Some lady who gives zero fucks about this film crew. No, wait.
 * 0:20 FOUR premises. 1, it's either such a good lie that it's good anyway, so check it out because WOWZA. 2, it's false, boooring.  3, if you don't like it turn it off, you little bitch.  4, It. is. true. WOWZA followed by standard late 1990s homebrew cards that don't look insane, just the credits are above and below the title card, which was probably (changing my opinion from given to an editor in post and wipes were added but the positions were never changed) probably provided as the title card and not changed.
 * 1:03 Expert fade from narration to physical host, expert handcam work, nobody would do this without a cut today because it looks tacky now, but this is somebody who knows what they are doing with videography.
 * 3:12 Another very good pan and zoom, with the transition into stills directed to a beat, the beat has a name, and his name is Robert Lazar.  Who claims to be a nuclear physicist speaking out openly about being hired to reverse engineer a UFO and can only describe the colors and the lack of sharp edges on the assumed alien ship.  Well done.
 * 5:53 guy is talking while driving slowly in his convertible car, obviously through a neighborhood, no wind noises. Mic setup would be a nightmare for an inexperienced crew, why is this guy claiming he got in trouble for not explaining the engine to the government and willing to go on record saying "it was marvelous" but nothing else?  They could sit on this technology and not tell us about it, grr, I'm angry too, minor violin crescendo, does the documentary slow down?  No way, crash into next expert and manic strings.
 * 7:02 Sean David Morton walks around by a lake like anybody else, but he wears a suit and has a camera crew because he's credible.
 * 7:18 Referencing information from Bobby, Sean speaks with authority that Bobby's info is good, so who shows up?
 * 7:49 Our familiar host to break up the nonsense with a little bit of pre-established credibility, which, if you've been paying attention, the host's statements are insofar based on zero information. Ohhh, Goddammit, I'm not even 8 minutes in, this is going to kill me.
 * 8:16 notice that the first cut back to our boy Sean starts with a slow zoom and then holds. What did he say before that zoom was the perfect one?  Either the cameraman is absolutely an all in genius on this shit and knows what's fucking WILD exactly as it's happening, or the lighting shows us this is MUCH later in the day.  I think they probably scooted a little further from the trail also.
 * No complaints about the special effects. You try doing that on a computer that CAN run Windows 98, except Windows 98 hasn't been invented yet.  That's expert level homebrew.
 * 9:19 My spirit animal while watching this film.
 * I'm going to give it up for the night, because I've just, you know, basically run out of time before bed, but I'll come back to it tomorrow. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:28, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, Chapter 2, Let's smuggle some tapes~ Anyobody so far in this video has had the ability to speak freely about what they've seen, nobody has noticed this production, so let's look at Rocket Pictures, a producer with absolutely no credits anywhere so far, I'll look for them in the final credits of this if I fucking survive, but here, scene, an office, all interior shots, and they even have a cool 90s visual art banner and a movie poster, you know, like the interior of the offices of a legitimate production company.  Anyway, here we go.  Targeted Individuals let this one leak, let's see what they have to say. I've already lost my patience.  I hope I can follow along without a million timestamps


 * 9:19 This is a fucking stage, I've already lost my patience. The narration also says they received a phone call, a male voice and shows their hidden male voice.
 * 9:41 Tom Coleman, President of Rocket Pictures, Walk down the hall and shuffle papers, you're a big exec.
 * 9:44 Audio is bad. In my current opinion, this is a down-to-earthing as opposed to the audio that was so fucking clean in the convertible.  Like, how do you mic a guy in a convertible and at a lake and totally miss wind, but mic a guyin a small room and it's bad?  Did you ask Rocket Studios to mic FOR you?
 * 9:56 Who?  Very serious person.
 * 10:18 A very strange feeling with not a single specific reference to what the film is about, but let's look back at the four main Premises. 's either such a good lie that it's good anyway, so check it out because WOWZA. 2, it's false, boooring.  3, if you don't like it turn it off, you little bitch.  4, It. is. true. WOWZA.  I didn't expect them all to show up so quickly and succinctly.
 * 10:18 again we're all expecting that transition to narration, it does this little flash wipe. Very expertly done.  There's no reason for it other than to hit a beat we're expecting, but replaces it with a flash wipe and drops in Tommy's payload.  Expertly done.
 * 10:45 Sound starts getting whack and inconsistent, and I really think the original sound crew probably left, probably because the creator could afford them for the host and the maniac interviews but probably not for the actors and other filler. I admit, I peeked ahead, the sound is something I've got to be prepared for.
 * This shit wore me out last night, I'm going to do this much tonight, minutia up to the real audio fucking mistakes feels like enough of a chapter.Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:26, 18 June 2020 (UTC)


 * 10:45 notice that increase in gain during the phrase "he had this on tape" really shines through on that background noise, the hiss. The decrease in this segment, as opposed to the last segment, was probably an attempt to lower the mood, make it more personal, and then blast it back up at the revelation.  But, that's my opinion.
 * Tom Coleman, the film producer exists, so maybe that tiny studio office exists too? Which makes me feel weird, I really hope it's a bad set.  I mean it's been 9 years at this point since Tom Coleman produced a film.  Why somebody would near-anonymously slide a VHS of an actual factual Alien Interview to a producer of The Garbage Pail Kids movie eight or nine years after his last film?  I don't know, maybe they liked those movies?


 * 10:47 Let's move on. Powerful blend of unrelated footage, not labeled as re-creation, then into re-creation that is first labeled by circumstance and year, then noted "Re-creation".  Frankly well done, I'd say this is extremely intentional to put the viewer on guard in order to put them off guard, to listen closely to the narrator and miss details like "Re-creation"  You saw the quick flash "top secret/majic eyes only" card, as if they could grab that and nothing else.  It is so unimportant to anything other than the buildup of suspense that they only crossfade it briefly, they made that.   Crazy yellow eyed alien thing, you saw it, I saw it, very freaky, not a part of the story, not real, played for effect.  Let's rumble on into a grainy black and white low FPS shot of a vintage car rolling up on gates.  Bright "EBE-1 In Custody 1949" frame-cut to look exactly like it's part of this video, followed by soft yellow "Re-creation" fades.  You're intended to believe the video until you see the cuts, which are obvious, but your first intuit is belief.
 * 11:55 I see Area 51 developed Powerpoint slides during this time.  Now, green paper with white text stamped into it and everything else typefaced on, yeah, I can see it.  Take a look at those fonts above the classic typeface.  1977, three different typefaces on one document.  I'm pretty sure the government doesn't go high style on secret documents.  Zoom in to show stippling to color the document, wait for it.
 * 11:58 With as bad as this looks, it's the perfect time to remind viewers this is all part of the recreation, you wouldn't need to maintain that during the "possibly fraudulent" document closeup.
 * 12:25 OK, here's manipulation falling on its face. "if SUCH AN EFFORT WAS MADE" then "it represents" no, it WOULD REPRESENT "the greatest achievement in linguistics since the deciphering of the Rosetta Stone."  DO NOT invoke linguistic achievements while using manipulative language, that is just awful.  And to equate deciphering Hieroglyphs to communing with aliens, even in 1997 that's playing to a base.


 * 12:35 "That such an achievement would be kept secret illustrates the hysterical blah blah blah" again, this is only surprising in its audacity, as we've crossed over into full assertion of narrative truth from the narrator.  During full on "re-creations" of things that "may be fraudulent"
 * 13:12 Skeptics are boiled down to a meager claim (see strawman) about a highly technologized civilization being willing to throw lives at delivering a cryptic message but those skeptics are countered by people who knew what these aliens were trying to say, which just so coincidentally also lines up with religious tropes.  Base engaged, woof.
 * Lost the patience, I'll probably not try tomorrow. Or I'll finally find the mental respite to keep going.  Who knows?  Probably won't tomorrow night. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:37, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Just for funsies over the weekend I watched Discovering Bigfoot which is BAD and injured me, which I didn't expect it to. Somehow I thought it would desensitize me a little.  The difference was, in its audacity, it showed unrelated and obviously forged footage that claimed to show actual Bigfoots.  The worse part was when they dragged this old professor out and confused him, sent him home, brought him back and confused him more so he would come over to the side of "Bigfoot, plausible."  It was just a different kind of terrible.  This kind of blatant dishonesty boils my brain, I just can't engage with it. I understand why they do it and how they do it, but I cannot comprehend THAT they do it, at least to an extent where they don't explicitly call it "funsies."  I am disengaging from this project, I don't need to be frustrated 24 hours out of every day.  It's phony, it's basic, me pointing out every minute detail isn't going to affect anything but my own mental stamina.  02:58, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Point of clarification for autistic people and others not well atuned to picking up irony - those are ironic comments e.g.


 *  Skeptics are boiled down to a meager claim (see strawman) about a highly technologized civilization being willing to throw lives at delivering a cryptic message but those skeptics are countered by people who knew what these aliens were trying to say, which just so coincidentally also lines up with religious tropes. Base engaged, woof.

That is said ironically, the "just so coincidentally also lines up with religious tropes" and "a highly technologized civilization being willing to throw lives at delivering a cryptic message" - doesn't mean that a highly technological civilization would do that or that their objectives would line up with our religious tropes.

It is said ironically - i.e. you are expected to interpolate and realize that no technological civilization advanced way beyond us would do such things.

[I know this is obvious to most but I help autistic people who are scared of such things and sometimes they find this page and ask me about it so I know there are readers out there who are very scared and need this said because they are so constituted they are irony blind, just like soem people are face blind].

Robertinventor (talk) 03:29, 13 July 2020 (UTC)