“Sir Noface” Documentary Review

Last week I reviewed Demon House thanks to a tip from my friend Sara of VP paRanormal that it was free for Prime members. This week I’m reviewing Sir Noface for the same reason.

I had been curious about this documentary. It was in Nashville last year for a viewing.

I ended up opting not to go, which I was a little sad about. But the tickets were some outrageous price. I want to say either $50 or $75.

For a movie with a brief Q&A with the director? Um, no. Thanks. I’ll pass. Even though I did think it might be fun to go do something like that.

Spared

OMG. Thank goodness I didn’t pay to see this. I wouldn’t have been a happy camper paying regular theater prices for this, much less inflated special-showing ones.

As it is, I’m annoyed with myself for having spent any of my time watching it. But at least thanks to Prime I was afforded the ability to fast-forward.

Because that’s what I ended up doing for most of the movie.

The Highlights

1. The setting is Australia. Chad Calek, the film’s director, hooked up with the Western Sydney Paranormal Research (WSPR) team on his first Australian tour. During one of WSPR’s lectures, Chad was heading out for a smoke when he “happened” to pay attention at that moment to their claim of catching a full-bodied apparition –or, as  Chad calls such a thing, “the Holy Grail of Paranormal Evidence.”
2. The footage was taken during an investigation on Cockatoo Island.
3. Fast forward to about 30 or 35 minutes in. You won’t miss anything except a little unnecessary set up and a lot of Chad talking about Chad. It’s around the 35 minute mark where you finally get to see the footage he makes such a hubbub about.
4. Chad questions the WSPR team about whether they faked the footage.
5. Chad asks his fried Danny Patterson, who has worked digital effects on big Hollywood movies, to take a look at the footage. Danny’s assessment finally comes in at the 1 hour 30 minute mark. He says it’s not based in reality. For some reason he determines the way the thing moves is not natural or human, but if it’s created it must be by someone with years of experience and fancy equipment.
6. Chad draws the conclusion this is the end all and be all evidence of a ghost caught on film.

The Problems

1. If any of the security officers on duty on Cockatoo Island the night the footage was taken were interviewed, you don’t see them on tape.
2. Supposedly the Australian government contracted with WSPR to see if the island was haunted because they were interested in opening it up to paranormal tourism and ghost hunts. No one from the government is ever questioned. Problematic because Chad made a big deal about what all people have to gain (money, fame, bragging rights, etc.) from pulling off a paranormal hoax. There was motivation to have a evidence, especially if WSPR might’ve been the team to help with any paranormal events on Cockatoo Island. He conveniently ignores that.
3. Chad never bothers to debunk the fact that he’s trying to chase fame and fortune by making the claim to have caught a ghost on tape.
4. Why is it never questioned that it’s awfully convenient the “ghost” plays peek-a-boo with the camera and looks directly at it? (Just as so many other “ghosts” have in other alleged ghost-caught-on-camera footage.)
5. Why is it automatically assumed the entity is a ghost? There was also this sudden bright flash of light that came from nowhere. They tried to recreate the ghost, but not the light. They also don’t question whether it could have not-from-this-Earth origins. (To me, the thing looks like one of the aliens from Signs.)

Shocking Twist – **Spoiler Alert!**

Stop here if you don’t want to know the shocking (written very sarcastically, so please read it that way) twist.

But if you do, or have already seen the movie, continue on.

“Sir” Noface is not even a sir. At least not an officer of a grown man kind of sir as is assumed through most of the movie.

Supposedly Chad has not only caught the first verifiable ghost on camera, but the first child ghost.

According to his calculations, Sir Noface is not very tall.

So obviously that means it must be the little boy ghost one of the WSPR team is said to have seen the same night the footage this movie is based on was taken.

Again, that strengthens my argument that it could be a little green man instead of a ghost.

Last Hurrah for Chad

The best part of the movie was the end. Not just the fact the torture was over. The fact Chad said he was ending his paranormal career.

Hallelujah! Amen to that!

Now that’s a good decision!

Alas, that too, is a farce.

Chad’s currently busy promoting the sequel to this movie, which is probably part of the reason this one is now available on Prime. Marketing ploy.

Rating

I knew Sir Noface was going to be bad, because it only had 2 out of 5 stars on Amazon. However, I watched because I wanted to see what had offended my friend Sara so much about it.

I got my answer.

This kind of nonsense is what gives real attempts at investigating the unknown, and the real investigators in search of the truth (rather than fame and fortune), a bad rap.

That’s why I’m giving it a half a skull. (Skellie is out of the reviewing on this one all together. He checked out five minutes into the movie. Wish I had joined him. Now I’ve wasted more time talking about this movie than it deserved.)