Invasion on Chestnut Ridge

source: Invasion on Chestnut Ridge

I'd like to but I can't take this documentary seriously even though I have an open mind about the subjects dealt with. As has been written, there's no evidence produced and no photos. One impossibility just as an example is the acorn-shaped object with 'hyroglyphic' (cyrillic?!) - as described - text on it that came down like a meteor. Anything that came down at meteor speed that could fill a flat-bed truck would destroy at least ,I think, the nearby town with the impact crater and shock wave produced! And what's so special about the location (beautiful as the countryside around is) anyway? Intelligently done though nevertheless and oddly, worth a watch.

An interesting story form the lesser known valuts of UFO lore. Despite being done almost entirely in archive footage and interviews with a few quests, the movie mantains a serious, even horror-like tone with appropriate ambience and editing, set in the ominous opening credits scene. There's no cosmic importance to the story, but it's filled with mindbending encounters and solid spooks, so it's a great way to spend an evening when you're in the mood for some solid paranormal storytime.

At just sixty minutes, it gets a little thin toward the end but overall, I enjoyed this. It's basically people talking about their experiences with UFOs and strange phenomenon in their area. Much of it deals with 1973 when there was a huge amount of UFO and Big Foot sightings. The people are all well spoken and give concise, compelling detail about what they've seen. What's missing is any evidence. There are mysterious government agents who come and grab cameras from kids, stomp out footprints of Big Foot, and change newspaper reporting. But no proof that any of this occurred. Even events that happened as recently as 2015--some type of monster dog and a huge bird were seen--are only described. No one took a photo. There is no security camera footage or police reports of anything before cell phones. There's simply nothing except people telling their stories. There's no collaboration--no one is asked, "Did you tell your wife/husband/friend?" and then that person is interviewed. Nope. All we have is the one person (and I think in every case it's a man talking.) In 2015, four women see a monster dog in the woods in the daylight; they were preparing for a hike. Three women run back to the car, one woman stares at the creature until it retreats to the woods. Again, no one took a photo or video. The women aren't even interviewed--it's told by someone else (a man) who heard about what they witnessed. This is known as hearsay. The good thing is, the director/producers/writers don't overplay their hand. They just let the people speak, no one is hysterical. They are all telling stories that, for the most part, happened back in the early/mid 70s. I recommend it, just wish they had worked a little harder to make it believable. And I'm guessing there is no proof any of this ever happened or they would have shown it! So, enjoy it for what it is!

IF there were SO many sightings, why no pictures? Too many drugs? Too much alcohol? A redneck's wet dream, but there's nothing here to see. Skip this nonsense!

What is this crap I've seen bugs bunny cartoons that seemed more real

One of the best documentaries I've seen in a good while.

Invasion on Chestnut Ridge