fightforsleep i quit watching it during the first episode because they couldn't get anything right, tbh. they called him "Robert Theodore bundy" instead of Theodore Robert bundy. get your facts right before making a show. also, it get the feeling that its fake ??? too many people, in my opinion, are hopping onto the supernatural bandwagon before they really know if there's an entity around or not.

pcrean1 Pseudo-scientific, sensationalised tripe. If you're ever mindlessly flicking through TV channels late at night and manage to stumble upon this show, thinking that you'll see actual interviews with convicted serial killers, don't hold out any hope for a thrilling, entertaining, gripping and informative program because you will be bitterly disappointed.

lysergic-acid Perhaps it's the growing culture of anti-intellectualism sweeping through our society, perhaps it's the abandonment of empirical science & rational thought, or perhaps it's just media sensationalism. Whatever the reason, there seems to be an upsurge in the number of drivel-spewing paranormal TV series pandering to the lowest common denominator of our society, and "Conversations with a Serial Killer" is the latest one.Following the tradition of "Ghost Hunters," "Paranormal State," "UFO Hunters," and "MonsterQuest," this self-professed paranormal "documentary" series has joined the ranks of the superstitious/pseudoscientific quackery inundating popular TV networks. True to form, the show is hosted by a painfully insipid "journalist" and a delusional, and likely brain dead, ex-cop "psychic medium," who together try to make contact with deceased serial killers from beyond the grave.They do a well enough job to suppress most of the supernatural mumbo-jumbo through the first half of the show. This part is at least watchable as it's just the two hosts interviewing different law enforcement professionals, criminal psychologists, etc. who've dealt with the serial killer's case. Although, the questions asked by the male co-host are expectedly inane, and the hokey, melodramatic narrative by the female "journalist" is more sensationalized commentary than it is informative reporting.The excessive use of over-stylized video filters and dramatic sound effects just adds to the cheap, played up feel of the show. And the segments where the two hosts actually visit "haunted" locations in order to contact ghosts are just plain insulting to the audience's intelligence. Since ghosts exist only in the minds of the naive, gullible or mentally disturbed, these segments inevitably show the two self-deluded hosts bumbling around in the dark under the cliché green glow of infrared cameras, freaking themselves out over the slightest noise or the movement of their own shadows.In short, this show is absolutely pitiful and a complete disgrace to true documentary TV shows, such as those shown on the BBC or National Geographic Channel. If you want to watch a _real_ documentary on serial killers, I think the A&E Biography Channel has some good exposés on famous serial killers.