Project Blue Book episode one, plus Richard’s interview for the episode

By | January 9, 2019


Here is a link to a clip the History Channel used for the first episode of Project Blue Book, which describes a very interesting case involving a dog-fight (of sorts) that took place in 1948 in North Dakota. At least, I THINK they included this when they aired the episode, but because we don’t have cable anymore, Tracey and I never saw the live airing of the episode (although we did previously receive private screeners to all the episodes).





11 thoughts on “Project Blue Book episode one, plus Richard’s interview for the episode

  1. MarkH

    Watched the first episode of Project Bluebook. I must be honest I was a little disappointed I really wanted this to be groundbreaking and thought-provoking. They could have made it vastly more compelling and intriguing by keeping more with the actual facts from the case file than they did. And it would have had more evidentiary value by putting in the witnesses they left out. I think in some ways it does an injustice to the story by disregarding these points. They should have kept in the facts and built the fiction around it not the other way around.
    Still loved it though as a work of fiction now though, all in all 7.5 /10.
    I hope I dont upset people with my critique.

    1. John Kafer

      I have to wholeheartedly agree with your assessment of this episode. I understand the need for dramatic license but it should not be at the expense of the real story. To my mind, the real story is just as fascinating and they would not have had to dress it up as much of they did. At least the cases are being introduced which is important but again, not at the expense of the facts of the incident. I really enjoyed the interviews at the end of the show much more and wished that they were much longer. In fact, this kind of informative analysis would make a much better show. In the end, it is what it is, and I did enjoy the show and will continue to watch.

      PS – Richard, you need much more airtime so as to bring an enlightened perspective of this case and the others that will follow. Has History talked to you yet about giving you your own show. That needs to happen.

  2. Carolyn Padgett

    We watched the first episode last night and we loved it. While we don’t have cable at our home we do have it here in our temporary home (hurricane displacement house)…so watching it while we can.
    So far we love how its been done. It kind of reminds me of the Xfiles series style a bit which I also loved.
    We’re excited to see the next episodes. The lead character J. Allen Hynek still reminds us of Richard (haha) the resemblance unreal.
    After the first episode was over I went to do some research on this about a UFO in a dog fight with pilots. I found one that caught my attention that accrued on Sept 18-19 1976 over Tehran-Iran. The entire event was completely reconstructed in great detail and just amazing.
    Here is the link.


  3. Carolyn Padgett

    Sorry about typos…spellcheck just pops in and I forgot to proof read but you get the message. Occurred not acruded.

  4. Eric Karch

    The episode was ok. Acting was good. I’ll watch the series, but we need more Richard for facts, and Vallee was given so little time that I blinked and almost missed him. I am more of a documentary type of guy anyway, just my humble opinion.

  5. Gary Roberts

    So what is wrong with these hollywood morons anyway? Or is this not Hollywood? When did an AT-6 two seat TRAINER aircraft get guns, and how does that plane look ANYTHING like a P-51?? Great. Episode One and you’ve already got your “Mylar Balloon”..

      1. Gary Roberts

        But it’s so’s not like the production had to go find a real P51 to film, this is all CGI animation anyway! So..the guy doing the modelling for the CGI fighter plane he did what? Just used something he already had modelled in his files? Ignored the script? Google’d “P51” and got pics of an AT-6 trainer? So ok, anyone under 50 just doesn’t know the difference nor do they care? Being a professional artist, illustrator, and motion picture production designer/art director, and an old guy into WW2, this is a real gaff..I may have to watch this whole series just to find the off-period and plain wrong sets and props..could be fun.

        1. Gary Roberts

          Aaahhhhhh….ok I see..the scene IN the hangar where they are examining the plane..they did need an airplane..and flyable AT-6 / SNJ trainers are actually quite common among collectors. Though there ARE quite a number of restored P51 fighters in private hands, it now occurs to me that unless this series is shot somewhere that has a collector nearby with a P51, BUDGET constraints would prohibit a trip with a crew and talent to the location..which would likely be California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas..if they shoot in Vancouver or anywhere other than LA, well…I can maybe see a justification. that doesn’t forgive the guns though..poor taste guys.

  6. Satyagraha

    I just did my homework and watched the DVRed first episode at my neighbor’s. The recording didn’t include any commentary, unless I mistook it for a commercial and skipped over it. Sadly, I guess it just showed me why this grumpy old man doesn’t have teevee anymore.

    How many times did Dr. Hyneck report having actual run-ins with men in black? I must have missed that part of the history. I think I saw from the previews that we’re going to get crop-circled next week. If I were much younger, I might want to meet that spy lady. But, I probably didn’t have the proper clearance for that anyway.

    Why do they call it, “The History Channel?” Is it because history is history, like my memory is just a memory?

  7. Kit

    The History channel stopped being about history long ago and turned itself into a comic book. Today’s everyday TV consumers don’t want historical facts and information. Knowledge? Boring. Fantasy? Now you’re talkin’. Most of life today is fantasy based anyway, as Richard has said.

Leave a Reply