John Company

Project Blue Book File on Tremonton Film, Utah, 1952

DOW-UAP-D102 · page 64 of 156

Page 64 of 156 of DOW-UAP-D102

Text

A machine read this text from the scan. When the text and the image disagree, the image is right.

COPY

UNCLASSIFIED

21 May 1956

MEMORANDUM FOR: The Scientific Advisor

SUBJECT: Report on Preview of Motion Picture "Unidentified Flying Objects"

1. Through the personal assistance of Col. Cross, Chief, Office of Information Services, AMC, an advance copy of the film "Unidentified Flying Objects" was previewed by pertinent members of ATIC on Friday, 18 May 1956, in Bldg 167, Area B, Wright Patterson Air Force Base.

2. The following represent the general comments and opinions with regard to the film previewed:

a. The film, purporting, to be factual and documentary, appears to over dramatize each case sighting.

b. The film strives, through its showing, to maintain the impression that an unknown menace or super-intelligent being, alien to this world, is constantly in the background.

c. The case sightings and the individuals portrayed (the acting was very amateurish for a Hollywood production) was factual to a certain extent. However, the conclusions, specific or implied, are those of the producer's and not those of the Air Force.

d. In each instance of the portrayal of a case, the film dramatically, and with great suspense, presents the incident and circumstances surrounding the sighting, then abruptly drops the matter in a "lady or the tiger" technique. This is, of course, the desired effect, calculated to let the viewer form his own (influenced) conclusions.

3. The following represent the specific comments or conclusions with reference to each case portrayed by the film, as supported by official material or data:

a. Great Falls (Marianna Case): We do not agree with the film's conclusion "not aircraft, not balloons, not birds." An extremely able and very detailed analyses performed by the scientific laboratory of one of America's largest aircraft companies, indicated, in conclusion, that, "aircraft reflections might possibly look like the images on the film." Supporting photos from the same analyses also indicate that an aircraft 100 feet in length, when observed from 10 to 12 miles looked exactly like the individual "white blops" shown. The absence of sound cannot be construed that the object is not an aircraft. As any personal experience will show, an aircraft may often be observed in the air at some distance, yet no sound may be heard.

DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10

UNCLASSIFIED

419 14VCC 67 A/FUN-4-54

DECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007