MovieChat Forums > Paranormal Witness (2011) Discussion > Suzy Doll

Suzy Doll

posted 9 years ago by Lets_talk_about_that
17 replies | jump to latest

This supposedly happened in 1983, the year after Poltergeist came out.
There are several thing this story has in common with happenings in the film:

-Six yr old little girl stares at TV static in a trance, exactly like in Poltergeist (back then it was very common for people to emulate the cute & iconic little girl in the movie, to stare at TV static and say "They're heeeeeere."

-Father claims the dining room chairs were balanced on top of the table with the legs suspended in mid-air. This exact thing happened in Poltergeist. See the pic:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-81t3gWuDLEc/ULFdTI1D_OI/AAAAAAAACEk/6GedstprGt0/s1600/tumblr_lcub941OBP1qedl16o1_500.png

-Haunting is heralded by a sudden dark storm-cloud seen coming into the neighborhood, just like in Poltergeist.

I just find it strange that several of the creepiest details were the same as in the extremely popular movie that came out at the same time. Not saying the haunting was fake, but possibly embellished, with aspects taken from the movie.

www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-j-winograd/PETA-KILLS-PUPPIES-KITTENS_b_2979220.html

[–] mickeyesbeck 9 years ago

I'm not sure if this is the story of the conjuring. The ending isn't right. Maybe it's another story of a possessed doll. I would love to see them cover the story that inspired Poltergeist. It's called "Popper the Poltergeist". It's very interesting.

[–] Carson_Wells 9 years ago

I agree with the original poster. These people are delusional. I didn't buy a word of their account.

[–] bsires-99552 9 years ago

One of the worst stories so far. A cloud coming up the street to posess a little girl's doll? That was just dumb. Not to mention if the doll could move around like they claimed it would have definitely got up out the trashcan.

[–] Alan_Michael_UK 9 years ago

Another weak episode yet again. When this show first aired it was far the best Paranormal TV show I have ever watched, season two still very good, season three not so good, but so far season four has been a big disappointment. We need to see more episodes of hauntings where you see the ghost. Come over to the UK and do some filming on haunted pubs, castles and hotels if you are running out of stories.

[–] supadude2004 9 years ago

It might be OT (reasoning below), but I'm just wondering if any of you caught the first episode of A Haunting's sister show, 'Alaska Haunting', yet?

If you did, what did you make of it? For now, I'll just admit that I've spotted enough problems/inconsistencies with it, that I'm surprised it even aired, let alone made the début episode.

BTW 'Alaska Haunting' doesn't yet have its own page here on IMDB, so I guess here is as good a place as any to seek others' opinions on it.

Nonetheless, I still wanted to say that I've opened a thread over on the A Haunting message board, if anyone is interested in giving his/her opinions on it. Frankly, given that it was coming from the esteemed 'A Haunting' stable, I was expecting something entirely different/entirely better! Thank you.

-
Sandwiched between The Principle of Mediocrity & Rare Earth Theory, you should see The Fermi Paradox

[–] peggypredhomme 9 years ago

I didn't buy it, it was very over the top mixing demons, poltergeists, ghosts, and possession of a person and a doll. It's like they mashed all of the supernatural things they could think of together. They did a combo of The Exorcist and Poltergeist.

[–] LadyBloodyMary 9 years ago

This was the weakest episode so far in my opinion. I just had to laugh out loud when the doll was found sitting on the toilet!

Like the OP has said a lot of stuff was very "Poltergeist"y which is suspicious.

The doll itself was so odd looking. From what I have seen on-line about this case (unless I'm confusing another by the same name?) the Suzy doll was a smaller, regular-sized doll who looked quite normal, not some as big as the child, Saw-faced creeper like this one. Idk.

What am I always telling you? You must pay no attention to what I say.

[–] vondiesel-1 9 years ago

I think the static TV & big creepy looking doll (it was more likely a normal little doll) and its handing on to another little girl were obviously production company creations but yes there seemed to be many similarities to movies like Poltergeist.

The family seemed normal people that had nothing to gain from making up the story, yet the story was almost unbelievable and Lorraine Warren being involved doesn't make me believe it anymore than if she wasn't involved.
I don't know what to believe with this one but it made an entertaining 45 minutes nonetheless.

[–] Lets_talk_about_that 9 years ago

But in the episode the family actually spoke about the little girl sitting in the chair "entranced," staring at the TV static. So it wasn't just a scene that production decided to add in.

I think the family were having a hard time, they're simple people (that's a nice way of putting it), and they decided to embellish or invent altogether this story in hopes that it might lead to a bit of money coming in. Who knows, they might have tried to put the word out at the time, calling local newspaper or whatnot. It's impossible to know, that was 30+ yrs ago, but there were definitely influences from Poltergeist in their story.

www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-j-winograd/PETA-KILLS-PUPPIES-KITTENS_b_2979220.html

[–] vondiesel-1 9 years ago

Yes, you're right about the TV, I went back and looked. Thanks for the correction.

I'd actually like to know if the people get paid for their story on this show, if they do I cannot imagine it being very much.

[–] supadude2004 9 years ago

@vondiesel-1

Just to answer your question, people who appear on the show are definitely paid, but with that being said, this much is certain: it's nowhere near the 'life changing sums of money' area.

From memory (as this is a question which was answered here, just over 2 years ago) and I stand corrected if wrong, it was something in the range of 500 to 1000 dollars per narrator, per episode.

However, in answering that question, I must stress this - if another of the posters who was around these boards when that question was first answered, remembers the exact figure (as I now can only approximately remember it), then please feel most welcome to 'fine tune' my answer and give a far more accurate response. Thank you & HTH.

Sandwiched between The Principle of Mediocrity & Rare Earth Theory, you should see The Fermi Paradox

[–] vondiesel-1 9 years ago

Cheers for that, it does confirm my wonderings. I sorta felt they probably got some money but nothing that'd warrant making up a fantastical story just to get on it.
I was doing some research on how they get people on and found this old interview from when Season 1 was airing, thought I'd share it in case anyone here was interested on the production side of the show.
http://www.themortonreport.com/entertainment/television/q-a-with-paranormal-witness-producer-mark-lewis/

[–] supadude2004 9 years ago

@vondiesel-1,

Many thanks, that was a very worthwhile link. I hadn't read it before, and it certainly proved very interesting, to me at least. What's more, I absolutely agree with your reasoning - why bother, for such 'non-life changing' amounts of money, to get so many people together just to spend hours and hours and hours rehearsing *all* the 'nitty-gritty' ins and outs of every case, so as to bluff perfectly every single angle of a concocted story, when interviewed separately? It doesn't make any sense at all.

For life changing sums of money - perhaps, but surely not for the sums that they are actually paying contributors! The occasional (yet still, very rare) episode, I do have great difficulty in accepting, and for various reasons - such as 'Cabin In The Woods', 'The Bad Man' and/or 'The Wolf Pack'. But almost all others feature very believable people.

Mr. Lewis, despite his not having any paranormal experiences, muses accordingly: "Even if they weren’t true, though, all of these contributors would have had to have come up with these incredibly detailed, convoluted, extraordinarily complicated tales and then had to corroborate one another. I just don’t think that’s possible".

There are, let's face it - far easier mediums to put out a 'bluffed up' ghost tale (...cough): My Ghost Story? Ghost Adventures? My Haunted House? Etc. All of these shows, are liberally littered with all the tells of deceit, and so are arguably far better places to get paid for one's story telling skills.

Sandwiched between The Principle of Mediocrity & Rare Earth Theory, you should see The Fermi Paradox

[–] endiadj 9 years ago

I thought this was one of the scariest episodes so far, along with the rain man episode. The creepiest part was when the girl opened the bathroom door and Suzy was sitting on the toilet. I laughed and shivered.

[–] vondiesel-1 9 years ago

That's definitely the main intent of the program. For me the scariest episode was 'The Visitors', just did my head in that story, the guy was so convincing that unless he's the greatest actor of all time, I couldn't help but believe him, he even came on these very boards to answer peoples questions about the episode. I believed that story and it was crazy with those little imps & that demonic creature, I'm a horror film fan but that creeped me out more than any film has done in decades.

[–] spoiledfrog 9 years ago

thought this was the fakest story they've ever done. some of them I'm skeptical of, others I believe and the research backs up, and this one is just plain bullsh. nice try

[–] Lets_talk_about_that 9 years ago

http://mttg2.movietvtechgeeks.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/paranormal-witness-suzy-doll-recap-2015-images-toilet-training-400x240.jpg

www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-j-winograd/PETA-KILLS-PUPPIES-KITTENS_b_2979220.html