The Filmography of James Fox: A Retrospective - Part 1: UFOs: 50 Years of Denial?

This 1997 documentary that was featured on the Sci-Fi and Discovery channels already has the disadvantage of being a made-for-TV documentary produced in the 1990s...on top of it appearing to be a relatively amateur effort overall. All of the information contained within the film has been well-tread at this point, although there are a few gems scattered throughout. At just under 50 minutes, it should make for a quick watch...unfortunately, the dated presentation and incredibly basic information had me frequently checking my watch. I don't want to say it's outright devoid of any value, though. The production team mostly avoided flashy graphics and settled for a simpler presentation, which certainly helps add to the credibility. Additionally, at least to my knowledge, most of the historical information remains accurate. 

(https://www.amazon.com/UFOs-Years-Denial-Expanded-Special/dp/B000A3456M)

 I don't want to spend too much time ragging on the production quality given that this was Fox's first go and I don't know anything about what went on behind the scenes. However, some of the witness interviews definitely left a lot to be desired from a technical standpoint: lack of a tripod or stable camera movement is immediately noticeable, and the sound quality is spotty (this is especially apparent during the windy outdoor interviews). The archival footage and graphic design work are basic, and lend the film a sort of "school movie" vibe. You know, the kind of thing you'd watch after your elementary school teacher pushes a TV cart into the classroom and pops in an old VHS. 

I wasn't really concerned with the technical side of this film, however. I was much more interested to see if the information presented still holds up, and especially if developments in UFO research over the past two decades have rendered the film obsolete. To my surprise, the information in the film as aged fairly well. This is mostly because it's surface-level basic, touching on things like Orson Welles' infamous War of the Worlds radio broadcast and images of UFOs appearing in Renaissance-era art and paintings.

The real meat of the film deals with the burgeoning topic of Area 51, which had yet to be officially recognized, as well as the testimony of Lt. Phillip James Corso, whose claims about the Roswell Incident have ingrained themselves in popular culture since the release of his book, The Day After Roswell. 

This is where the film starts to go off the rails a little bit, away from a simple history lesson and into speculation and conspiracy. Some of this information comes from former U.S. Army Command Sergeant Major Robert Orel Dean, who spins a fascinating and rather dubious tale of the U.S. Army having recovered so much crashed UFO material that it has since been split between at least three USAF bases as well as Area 51 itself.

I was unfamiliar with Dean prior to watching the film, and some cursory research shows that his claims of a Cosmic Top-Secret NATO document called "The Assessment" were wildly inconsistent and did not stand up to close scrutiny. As such, he seems to have fallen into relative obscurity.

On the other hand, the testimony of researcher Chuck Clark still seems to be relevant and has held up over time. It appears that we owe much of our current knowledge of Area 51 to Mr. Clark, who was one of the original researchers of the mysterious Nevada base. Clark went as far to find legal vantage points of Area 51 and subsequently made some fascinating and highly credible UFO sightings, presumably of experimental US aircraft. Fox himself still speaks highly of Clark in a recent interview with Richard Dolan, where he describes an astonishing UFO video shown to him by Clark that has since been lost.

The last segment of the film delves into Lt. Corso's now-infamous claims about Roswell. To my knowledge, a lot of the information provided by Corso is still hotly debated to this day. While I do think some of his tale is unbelievable, it can't be as easily brushed off as Robert Dean's testimony. Corso also makes one of the film's most poignant statements: "The message of my book I'd like to see [sic] is that the younger generation look at this, and see what we did, and see the help we got from outer space, and that these beings exist. Give this information to the young people [...] of this country. They want to hear it, they want it. Give it to them. Don't hide it and tell lies and make stories. They're not stupid! It's their information." 

As a young person of this country, I agree wholeheartedly! 

The last and definitely most relevant tidbit of information to be gleaned from the film is a statement from astronaut and UFO proponent Edgar Mitchell. I don't think the importance of this quote can be understated, because it still rings true, in many ways today more than ever. The film asks the audience a very fair question, one that's consistently brought up by skeptics: "How could a government, known for it's inability to keep a secret, have maintained one of such magnitude for so long?"

Responds Mitchell: "Well, it hasn't maintained it. It's been leaking out all over the place. But the way it's been handled is by denial. [...] There has been a very large disinformation and misinformation effort around this whole area. [...] It's the disinformation effort that's concerning here, not the fact that they have kept the secret, they haven't kept it. It's been getting out into the public for fifty years or more..."

So, is UFOs: 50 Years of Denial worth going back and watching today? All respect to Mr. Fox, of course (I'm a huge fan), but I'd have to say no. There's nothing here that isn't common knowledge or hasn't been covered in more recent films and TV shows. Too much time is spent on the since-debunked claims of Robert Dean, and while some of the witness testimony is compelling, it's not particularly outstanding. Unless you're dying for more testimonies, the content in Out of the Blue, I Know What I Saw, and The Phenomenon is not only more credible, but a whole lot more watchable too.