America's Most Haunted Inns (2004)

Documentary. The Jeff Corwin Experience comes to ghost-haunting excursions. A blonde medium ambles through New England inns of haunted repute, affectionately addressing "spirits" by name and calling them beautiful. While she seems sincere, she offers no context for her bemused conversations, so she comes off as either cryptically authentic or slightly crackers. I gave the film makers the benefit of the doubt for sincerity and integrity, but the lack of explanation for any of their "evidence" indicates they are only playing to willing converts who want to believe in ghosts without authentic reason to do so. (They claim to present proof but neglect or fail to do so.) What video camera and still camera are these that capture dozens of "spirit" globules floating in mid-air, and where can I get one of each? Doesn't the photographer's constant camera flashing scare the spirits or wash out the dust motes? (Um, exactly how was PhotoShop put to use anyway?) And boy, some of those "spirits" look like cigarette smoke -- and while we assume he doesn't smoke while on the prowl inside the historical inns (though some guests with ghost stories were), we witness him smoking while approaching a "spirit" in the alleged most gripping scene at the end. Skepticism works in two ways: The producers have to present their "documentary" in as objective a manner as possible and work to explain away every appearance of subjectivity. (Integrity cannot be assumed, it must be demonstrated.) Similarly, the inn owners as subjects have to participate objectively; only one former owner did. (Would have been good: "We have reports of a lot of activity in these two rooms, which happen to be directly over the tunnel." Bad: "We have reports of a lot of activity in this area, because it's near the tunnel." Would have been good: "A guest reported a sighting in this room on this date, which happens to be the anniversary or location frequented by [historical character]." Bad: "[Historical character] visits us quite often. [Chuckle] He seems to feel right at home with us." In other words, coincidence is good, though not proof; assumption of proof as well as causality is bad.) I'm not saying the photos captured spirits or dust motes, though the latter certainly sounds more plausible. And that is the third way that skepticism works: Occam's razor says that all things being equal, the simpler answer tends to be the correct one. This movie wasn't laughable but it sure wasn't believable -- except to those the producers chose to interview. 3 stars.