The UFO Iconoclast(s)

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Viacom Casting Producer seeks help

Hello --

My name is Evan Altshuler, and I am a Casting Producer for for a non-fiction, TV production company currently working on a new, untitled project being developed for a major cable network. You can take a look at other shows we've produced at BigFishDC.com.

Every year, thousands of people report strange encounters with unknown creatures. I am reaching out to you for help in finding individuals who have been abducted by aliens and are willing to share their stories on television.

This show is not intended to answer questions or pass judgment. We are simply trying to understand the memories of people who have had paranormal experiences. Our company takes the pain of those who believe they have been afflicted by such phenomena seriously, and we are looking for honest articulate abductees to share their stories.

If this is something you are interested in, please reply to my email or call me directly at 646-481-7296.

If this does not seem like you, but you know others who may be interested, please forward this message on.

Thank you very much. I hope to hear from you soon.

Evan Altshuler

Evan Altshuler | Casting Producer | New York | NY 10013 | tel. + 646-481-7296
CastingProducer@yahoo.com

27 Comments:

  • Some suggestions: Interview David Jacobs, the puppet master, or Bud Hopkin's ex wife. Look into the skewed work of Dr John Mack, the CIA sponsored experiments of disassociation and suggestion.
    Your request reads like shorthand for kill time-entertainment fodder for an illiterate audience that equates ambivalence for investigative journalism.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • Addendum: Check the history of Harvard University and the associated funding of CIA sponsored experiments. Look into Dr David Jacob's university and why they have turned a blind eye to one of their own who practices psychiatry without a license and then issues books on his experiments in the public domain as educational material concerning an alien agenda. Is this an experiment of another stripe to manipulate? On whose behest?

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • Rich et al,

    Let me begin by saying (off the cuff) I know nothing of this production company or Mr. Altshuler.

    That said, it is my presumption that y'all do and are knowledgeable and have done your due diligence in this matter prior to hanging their shingle on your site (i.e., endorsing them).

    Generally speaking, the perception by the public of the UFO phenomenon is the end result of the MSM (i.e., the idiot box) and the last thing it needs is another silly reality show, or for profit first, facts second docu-drama, etc.

    As you know, good documentaries are rare as are the producers responsible for them, I hope Altshuler & Co. fall into the minority.

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • Frank:

    I give vent and publicity to almost everybody, good or evil, except those who give me a bad time, personally.

    But you're right, items and people should be vetted.

    I'm just not the guy to do that.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • Rich,

    Forgive me; however, publishing (and by doing so, promoting) Altshuler's casting call seemed out of character for a media watch guy and often critic of same, as well as a UFO Iconoclast–which is why I presumed the "vetting" would have been "by you" in advance.

    Do I detect a softening in posture?

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • When it comes to UFOs, Frank, everything's okay with me, except maybe leading people to anti-semitic stuff, using UFOs as a tease.

    UFOs are gamey: they personify the good, the bad, and the ugly.

    So I take a somewhat cavalier stance with the topic.

    (Or maybe I am getting soft, or soft-headed.)

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • @Frank Warren

    You mean the way you've done with Ray Stanford????

    hahahahahahahaha

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • That's a great zinger to Frank, Rich... but fair is fair, so here's one for you:

    What about your stated approach makes you any different than UFO Updates?

    By the way, and apropos of nothing really, but don't you find it just a bit ironic that after chastising me (and others) for our focus on old cases (like RB47), you now seem to be focused on... old cases!!

    I find it quite amusing, so thanks for the chuckles.

    Best,
    Paul

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • The zinger, Paul, comes from Frank Stalter to Frank Warren.

    I never complained about the RB47 story because it was old. I was saying it's not the best UFO case extant.

    As for UFO UpDates, the place is nasty and off-kilter.

    I keep trying to keep our blogs on track, but it's a chore -- a major chore.

    UFO people are intrinsically off-kilter, me among them.

    Glad to have you drop by now and then.

    You provide a semblance of sanity.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • Yes, quite right - it was Frank with the zinger (and a good one too - Stanford is beyond the pale).

    I lurk, but mostly for entertainment (sort of the same thing as watching MMA, or the Housewives of DC, or similar types of TV programming), as I watch people arguing about things that aren't even worthy of the epithet of petty.

    Meanwhile, Lance, who seems to have lots of time on his hands, and remains an ardent critic of others, has yet to follow through with his deconstruction of the 1953 Santa Barbara Channel case, first raised around two years ago (give or take, as I recall it).

    And to think that some people still ask me why I moved on to other things!

    Paul

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • Oh, I envy your guts -- moving on that is.

    Smart, sane.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • Yes, a little back and forth between you and Lance about that one got me to take a closer look. It's just one of those cases where the closer you look the more interesting it is. Lance's crits were the usual word parsing really regarding your doc segment and the basis for some estimates, which I think were pretty good estimates based on what my aviation guy tells me. The case should be more well known as should Kelly Johnson's founding of Area 51, not even mentioned in that recent Jacobsen book.

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • I'll just remind Paul, if you will allow Rich, that I offered to tell him about my theory over the phone but I have been lazy about writing it up. I think we left it that he would let me know a time to talk.

    It's not a magnum opus or anything, rather simple and guaranteed not to be embraced by everyone (or maybe anyone!). I think it's knowing the blowhard responses by the believers that doesn't hurry me in offering it up.

    It would certainly change nothing and much of it would be spent correcting the idiotic mistakes of creation scientist, Brad Sparks, that Paul used as the basis for his video account.

    Best,

    Lance

    By Blogger Lance, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • The only estimate Paul via Sparks provided was the size of the UFO, about 200 feet. It had to be roughly that big for the crew of the Constellation to have seen it at all. They were 40-50 miles away and nothing indicates they used any binoculars.

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • OhmyGod...

    We're not going to resurrect that damn case here, I hope...

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • It does fit well with the topic!

    No, I will beg off, Frank. We cam discuss it elsewhere sometime.

    Back on topic, Frank Warren does provide some good guidance. These TV reality shows are almost always horrible and the same goes for their producers.

    Understanding, sensitivity, and intelligence is not going to be a byproduct of this effort, I submit.

    Lance

    By Blogger Lance, at Thursday, September 29, 2011  

  • No, no, Rich, although it's a better case than the one's you're resurrecting lately. I just felt obliged to point out, for no particular reason I guess, the drive-by tactics of most disbelievers like Lance, which resemble the drive-by tactics of the true believers.

    In the case of the disbelievers (er... "skeptics"), the refrain goes something like this: "hey," they say in a public forum, "this case is easily solved"... and then they leave people with the impression that it has indeed been solved, even though they never actually follow through with a public detailing of that solution. If someone like Sparks, or Friedman, or Randle, or whomever, ever did that, they would be rightly all over them for it.

    Again, I find it all quite amusing (much better than re-runs of Storage Wars), and as you've opined before Rich, probably better suited to a psychological or sociological study of the people involved than the actual subject matter itself.

    But by all means, continue nattering on about photos of the Andromeda galaxy, as if that's important in any way, shape or form...

    PK

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Friday, September 30, 2011  

  • Paul,

    In a recent discussion here on Iconoclasts, Lance and I had an exchange on the Kelly Johnson sighting.

    http://tinyurl.com/62d3yzs

    Not the reply you want, but still perhaps of interest.

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Sourcerer, at Friday, September 30, 2011  

  • "I guess, the drive-by tactics of most disbelievers like Lance, which resemble the drive-by tactics of the true believers. "

    And the Kimball method (seen here) is different how?

    Lance

    By Blogger Lance, at Friday, September 30, 2011  

  • Frank S,

    Publishing UFO related minutiae, in the form of OPEDs, reports, articles etc., by UFO mavens, proponents or for that matter any author at a UFO oriented web-site (i.e., The UFO Chronicles) is a tad bit different then publishing what in essence is an advertisement for someone, or in this instance a production company (no offense Rich).

    Quite frankly, when I read the post, I assumed Rich probably knew Altshuler and I was expecting him (Rich) to come back with a enlightening, favorable report on the company etc.

    When rich replied, and acknowledged that this wasn't the case . . . well, it just seemed "out of character" for the reasons I cited.

    Additionally, I often wear my feelings for the MSM and or how the UFO subject matter is represented by the television medium on my sleeve, as evidenced by my commentary.

    Again, good docs and producers thereof are a rarity, I have my fingers crossed that Altshuler & Co. fall into that category, however, I'm not optimistic.

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Friday, September 30, 2011  

  • Well, Frank et al....

    I asked the VP of our local ABC/NBC/Fox affiliate, and a friend of our MediaWatch here, about the company, Big Fish Entertainment.

    He tells me the production company is legit and has cachet among TV broadcasters.

    It is a Viacom adjunct.

    (You all know Viacom, right?)

    So you can relax now, and know that our airing a plug for the company is without cause for alarm.

    Frank Warren, you like UFO material to be decent and fair; truthful and without taint.

    That's a position which is rare in ufology, and an admirable position, surely.

    Yet it is idealistic to a fault.

    Ufology and the UFO community is so rife with disreputable persons and ingredients that hoping for the purity that you desire is a wish that ultimately has to go unfulfilled.

    We can only provide scrutiny, after the fact, and hope to make correctives to the UFO record then.

    Trying to co-opt positions beforehand is a duty best left to God (or something equally divine).

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, September 30, 2011  

  • Rich,

    You wrote:

    I asked the VP of our local ABC/NBC/Fox affiliate, and a friend of our MediaWatch here, about the company, Big Fish Entertainment.

    He tells me the production company is legit and has cachet among TV broadcasters.

    It is a Viacom adjunct.

    (You all know Viacom, right?)

    So you can relax now, and know that our airing a plug for the company is without cause for alarm.


    Kudos from the a fore mentioned does little for me re alleviating any fears of a poor production.

    [One of the worst documentaries both by shenanigans behind the scenes, as well as the end product I've witnessed was endorsed and aired by National Geographic –you know NG right? (humorous, sarcasm intended :>))– See my editorial: National Geographic Solves Roswell UFO Enigma! http://tinyurl.com/3hgoyll]

    You wrote:

    Frank Warren, you like UFO material to be decent and fair; truthful and without taint.

    That's a position which is rare in ufology, and an admirable position, surely.

    Yet it is idealistic to a fault.


    Actually, Rich–I'd be happy with documentaries to be well-researched, factual and without bias.

    You wrote:

    Ufology and the UFO community is so rife with disreputable persons and ingredients that hoping for the purity that you desire is a wish that ultimately has to go unfulfilled.

    We can only provide scrutiny, after the fact, and hope to make correctives to the UFO record then.

    Trying to co-opt positions beforehand is a duty best left to God (or something equally divine).


    I'm afraid you misunderstand Rich; the only purity I'm looking for re (UFO) documentaries is in the "work ethic." Thorough research + unbiased approach and presentation of the "facts" = good product.

    Moreover, actions "can be taken beforehand" in order to improve film-making and in some instances "prevent" it; for example, (in the recent past) at last count, the number of researchers who declined to be involved with UFO Hunters was in double digits, and recently I found two more individuals who declined to participate.

    Unity amongst researchers can go a long way in these instances. If production companies are vetted properly and found to be less then respectable or have a track record of sub-par productions then a unified stance of nonparticiaption might go a long way.

    True, there will always be someone who wants to "see their name in lights" however, I know for a fact that this methodology can be effective (and has been).

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Friday, September 30, 2011  

  • You're a good guy, Frank Warren, and you expect others to be so too.

    However, we are all cursed with original sin, and TV companies have more original sin than the rest of us.

    I have never known a media construct to get the "facts" right or to pursue their stories until the truth is as final as truth can be.

    Shortcutting and human foibles derail the purity that one would like in the pursuit of truth.

    But we should hold out for such, even though we nihilists think it's a futile effort.

    And what if some company or person provides the truth as best as it can be discerned? You can bet that those hearing or reading it will misconstrue or perceive that truth in ways encumbered by their own faults and moral maladies.

    It's human nature.

    But keep striving for your ideals Frank.

    That's why some of us luv ya and admire you.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, September 30, 2011  

  • "Thorough research + unbiased approach and presentation of the "facts"

    Man, I long for that after reading just about every article posted at UFO updates...but alas, all in vain.

    Lance

    By Blogger Lance, at Friday, September 30, 2011  

  • Rich,

    You wrote:

    You're a good guy, Frank Warren, and you expect others to be so too.

    As always–thanks for the kind words; however, you over-rank my expectations.

    However, we are all cursed with original sin, and TV companies have more original sin than the rest of us.

    I have never known a media construct to get the "facts" right or to pursue their stories until the truth is as final as truth can be.


    I'm sure if you "raked the memory banks" you could and would recall a "media construct" that presented factual information in a manner that at the very least would be palatable to us all; however, I do agree you'd have to give it some thought.

    Sticking with production companies, re documentaries I know there are ethical, hardworking folk out there who care about presenting the facts (acurately), as I'm fortunate to call a few friends . . . but again, these are in the minority.

    Shortcutting and human foibles derail the purity that one would like in the pursuit of truth.

    But we should hold out for such, even though we nihilists think it's a futile effort.


    It isn't always futile; big things have come from the minds of a single man or woman, not mention people united.

    There are of course other factors which lend to the quality of the final product, (which aren't so iniquitous) e.g., time, money and the compromises that have to be made with a network; however, all of the producers are on the same playground and should be judged accordingly.

    And what if some company or person provides the truth as best as it can be discerned? You can bet that those hearing or reading it will misconstrue or perceive that truth in ways encumbered by their own faults and moral maladies.

    It's human nature.


    Of course you're absolutely correct and "one's truth" will always be their own; however, let the individual come to that truth based on unbiased, factual information.

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Friday, September 30, 2011  

  • In fairness to our documentary making friends, there are time constraints they have to work within and sometimes this UFO stuff gets very detailed and nuanced. There's often a lot on the margins that ideally should be included but an hour less commercial breaks only allows so much.

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Friday, September 30, 2011  

  • Message to RRR Group: The best researched documentary film of the past 20 years that I have seen is, "UFO OVER SOUTHERN ILLINOIS" produced by the Discovery channel. If you are not familiar with this film, please check it out on You Tube and let us know if you concur.

    Thank you.

    By Blogger ffkling, at Monday, October 03, 2011  

Post a Comment

<< Home