What do you think?
Rate this book
Paranormal Activity: True Tales of Possession
Publisher's Summary
You may know Katie Featherston and Micah Sloat from Paranormal Activity, the 2007 found-footage horror film that launched a blockbuster franchise. Now, inspired by the fictional haunting that brought them together, the friends and former co-stars are examining real-life stories of demonic possession, tracing the phenomenon from its earliest known accounts to its modern-day headlines.
With help from noted experts in witchcraft, shamanism, exorcism, and parapsychology, Katie and Micah explore chilling cases throughout history and across cultures, challenging our understanding of the world—or worlds—around us.
©2024 Paramount Pictures Audio, a division of Paramount Pictures Corporation (P)2024 Paramount Pictures Audio, a division of Paramount Pictures Corporation
You may know Katie Featherston and Micah Sloat from Paranormal Activity, the 2007 found-footage horror film that launched a blockbuster franchise. Now, inspired by the fictional haunting that brought them together, the friends and former co-stars are examining real-life stories of demonic possession, tracing the phenomenon from its earliest known accounts to its modern-day headlines.
With help from noted experts in witchcraft, shamanism, exorcism, and parapsychology, Katie and Micah explore chilling cases throughout history and across cultures, challenging our understanding of the world—or worlds—around us.
©2024 Paramount Pictures Audio, a division of Paramount Pictures Corporation (P)2024 Paramount Pictures Audio, a division of Paramount Pictures Corporation
Audible Audio
Published July 24, 2024
5 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
February 25, 2025
You could say this piece of shit kind of got the last laugh over me.
When I finished it, I was so annoyed and over it, that I kept putting off writing my review. Now, because of this, I am banked up four books that are also awaiting a review. If I don't get to them soon, I might forget what order I finished them in, and this is not desirable for me. Furthermore, now that I have finally decided to get off my arse and revisit the damned thing in order to write this, all the raw anger and disgust I felt upon finishing it has now fizzled out to just a slightly off-colour feeling, like a stubborn burn mark you might find clinging to the bottom of your saucepan no matter how much you wash it, scrape it with Steelo, or marinate it in vinegar which apparently works, though I am not fully convinced yet.
So, I guess I am not going to be as harsh as I should have been. But without further ado ...
I chose this not even knowing it was directly related to THE Paranormal Activity franchise. PA phenomena itself was certainly an established concept long before the ultra-popular movies came along; it's hardly like the phrase is trademarked. I figured it would probably be stupid but then again, it might be good. My next fix of Night Owl's masterful paranormal podcast on Audible was still depressingly far away, so I thought this might give me some small satisfaction in the meantime.
I do not know why exactly it is, but I've really been digging getting super spooked out recently - more, that is, than I already always have done. I love getting myself worked up over thoughts of spirits, presences perhaps even watching me when I'm not aware of them, that I have to fight not to be distracted by the tingling hairs on my back as I stand at the kitchen sink, my wife and kids in bed, slaving away at the dishes, dummies, cutlery, etc. Pause the audiobook or horror movie soundtrack*, sure that I just heard my name spoken. Turn around and face the empty room behind me ... "Chrissy?"
Decide that I'm not quite comfortable with the door to the pitch-black laundry standing open across the room. Giving in to my childish old ways of making sure the stairwell light is on before I flood the downstairs into darkness. Walking up a darkened staircase has always sat uncomfortably with me.
But this podcast, right off the bat, was not scary. After the initially pleasant surprise of learning that the starring couple of the original movie are the hosts, anybody with more than a passable intelligence and a fondness for the supernatural (oxymoron? No, fuck off!) will quickly realise what a phoned-in, surface level, cheap, sensational load of disingenuous garbage this obnoxious podcast is going to be. (That was eight adjectives in a single sentence, by the way).
Its very entrance is hammy and inauthentic. Following the lame and overly dramatic introduction of boilerplate spooky music, demon noises, screaming, horror tropes, Micah and Katie are personable for about ten seconds. Then it's straight to stupid questions that belie one of either two things: either they are absolutely clueless about their subject ("So, what is possession? Because, you know, like, all I think about is, The Exorcist, green puke, spinning heads, blah, blah, blah"), or they are being children's entertainer levels of condescending, probably correctly assuming most of their listeners will be idiots who think Hollywood trash like Paranormal Activity is anything close to realistic.
To be honest, I feel like it's even a bit of both. Micah might say he's a student of and enthusiast for the paranormal, but throughout the podcast, as he interviews his so-called "expert" guests, he consistently reveals himself to be confused about what exactly - or even if - he believes.
Katie plays the budding psychologist who is sceptical until she is exposed to anything requiring the slightest suspension of disbelief, ultimately serving as little more than a sounding board for Micah. Yet, despite apparently knowing little about the subject, she seems well-versed in all the stories (supposedly true, but who knows?) that pertain to ghosts, possession and exorcism. You can't play the empty vessel, Peggy-Sue like character for the uninitiated to identify with, and then straight up pull knowledge and anecdotes out of your ass without seeming fake.
And it's just the way they talk to each other. It's all positive vibes and rubbing each other's egos with nice platitudes and enthusiastic ejaculations (yes ...), interspersed with sensational, teenage-level stories which themselves are complimented with cheesy voice acting that is jarring to put it nicely. Many a time, they jump back into the 1930s or somewhere thereabouts, sometimes even the nineteenth century, and yet the characters in each reenactment speak like typical millennial actors in something you might watch on the SyFy channel when you're sick and too weak to even reach for the damned remote.
I am aware that my negative and ranty review has so far focussed only on the people hosting it. And yes, this would seem a tad bit petty and personal rather than anything objectively valid. But I cannot help the fact that, for me, the personalities of the hosts and their presentation style immediately rubbed me the wrong way. If I were to lower myself to sharing one more personal gripe, it would be the way they talk to and about each guest. Aside from the Catholic priest, with whom they are unsurprising standoffish, they act like a couple of doped-out hippies. Micah could not be more excited to welcome each guest if he literally creamed in his pants upon announcing their names. And then when the interviews are over, Katie almost without fail waxes into this bizarre prattle about how she just loves that person, Oh, his energy, such a beautiful person, and I love him because you love him, Micah. And I love that we were able to share in this beautiful conversation today. Just say namaste and get the orgy over with.
Moving on to the content itself ...
Well, yes, it briefly explores a number of real-life cases where someone was allegedly possessed by some sort of supernatural entity. Not all of them involve the ritual of exorcism, and some credit should be given for Micah and Katie offering a range of different examples that reflect a variety of cultures, religions, superstitions and responses to the unseen world. But, to begin with, each story is only glanced at.
We get, as mentioned earlier, some very campy soundbites to depict the scene - the actors of which seem hardly interested in giving their money's worth - and these are no more convincing than the increasingly awful sequels to the Paranormal Activity movies. Following the B-grade audio treatment, Micah or Katie will read off the most simplified, sensational version of events, with little to no critical examination of the case at hand (barring one, which I will get to shortly). Then some witch or rabbi or whatever the hell will show up and answer basic questions that do little but muddy the waters between what is real and what is just a load of self-projected malarkey, with constant recourse to a relativistic defence: "Hey, if it's real to me, or you, or them, then in a way it truly is real, even if it isn't".
To be fair, I do not wholly reject this premise, since no one person does or ever can have all the answers to life's big questions - though there are certainly many that act like they do. None of us can speak for the experiences of anyone else, which includes how their religious and/or spiritual beliefs (or lack thereof) shape their lives and interaction with the world. But at the same time, this whole "everything is reality because nothing is" non-dualist stuff too often serve as convenient whiteout against the need for more objective analysis. Like it or not, there always is an Absolute Truth buried beneath so many levels ofmaya, although neither I nor anyone else has the privilege or capacity of grasping it barring very special circumstances which are just about impossible to confirm, thus remaining a matter of personal belief. Apparently, I am a Critical Realist, which I'm fine with. It sounds kind of cool. But being one these, although I acknowledge the subjectivity of all views including mine, I cannot help being frustrated by such groundless forays into what is already a complex and abstract concept. We need to establish at least some basis of belief from which we can analyse and interpret.
The two enlightened hosts of this podcast decline to do this, and so at least appear to take everything - from sorcery to reincarnation to Judaic monsters - at face value. Which is fine - whatever; it's that kind of thing. But then, when it comes to Catholic exorcisms, which have largely been the lens through which Western moviegoers have become familiar with the subject, it suddenly becomes cool to play the sceptic. The particular case provided in representation of Catholic exorcism conveniently is not one that emphasises those big, scary, ever-diverse demons and their expulsion by holy rite, but one that picks holes in the misguided beliefs of a Catholic priest and parents of a mentally ill (not possessed) young girl.
The case of Anneliese Michel is a tragic one which reflects badly on the faith-informed decisions of those involved. There is no denying that. Nor can one deny that questions of demonic possession verses mental illness should never be taken lightly. There is a massive amount of danger in confusing the distinction, and any religious view that insists on seeing demons where there are none lends itself to high levels of delusion and manipulation. But the failed exorcism of Anneliese Michel and the hosts' virtue-signalling over how angry they are that the Church would sanction such a practice is extremely misleading and hypocritical.
Nothing should be spared the prying blade of scepticism if it makes bold claims that impact people who believe in them. But when that scepticism is employed selectively - as it is here, solely for the sake of challenging Christian teachings - and is bolstered by an already biased framework that seeks to focus only on the negatives, then you get this shit. And I do just find the hypocrisy a bit too much to stomach. That these fools, whose stupid movie franchise has gone out of its way to both sensationalise and encourage meddling with the demonic, would decide to then question the very existence of demons and even spirits because nothing is less cool than giving credence to Catholicism. We've just spent hours listening to you go on and on about all this paranormal stuff. Now you're trying to wriggle out of acknowledging such things because they happen correspond with Catholic teaching about sin and the nature of evil.
I don't know, man. It just annoyed me. I was already hating the podcast long before they set out to portray my religion as a creepy cult of deluded lunatics. I had already known that it was probably going to get one star from me. This stuff at the end, and the unpleasant taste it left in my mouth, simply pulled it further down. Say, more of a zero-star affair.
Fucking terrible.
* My personal favourites, for their music and just eerie atmosphere: The Sixth Sense (James Newton Howard), The Gift (Christopher Young), The Changeling (Rick Wilkins), The Others (Alejandro Amenábar), Alien (Jerry Goldsmith), Pet Sematary (Elliot Goldenthal), Salem's Lot (Harry Sukman).
When I finished it, I was so annoyed and over it, that I kept putting off writing my review. Now, because of this, I am banked up four books that are also awaiting a review. If I don't get to them soon, I might forget what order I finished them in, and this is not desirable for me. Furthermore, now that I have finally decided to get off my arse and revisit the damned thing in order to write this, all the raw anger and disgust I felt upon finishing it has now fizzled out to just a slightly off-colour feeling, like a stubborn burn mark you might find clinging to the bottom of your saucepan no matter how much you wash it, scrape it with Steelo, or marinate it in vinegar which apparently works, though I am not fully convinced yet.
So, I guess I am not going to be as harsh as I should have been. But without further ado ...
I chose this not even knowing it was directly related to THE Paranormal Activity franchise. PA phenomena itself was certainly an established concept long before the ultra-popular movies came along; it's hardly like the phrase is trademarked. I figured it would probably be stupid but then again, it might be good. My next fix of Night Owl's masterful paranormal podcast on Audible was still depressingly far away, so I thought this might give me some small satisfaction in the meantime.
I do not know why exactly it is, but I've really been digging getting super spooked out recently - more, that is, than I already always have done. I love getting myself worked up over thoughts of spirits, presences perhaps even watching me when I'm not aware of them, that I have to fight not to be distracted by the tingling hairs on my back as I stand at the kitchen sink, my wife and kids in bed, slaving away at the dishes, dummies, cutlery, etc. Pause the audiobook or horror movie soundtrack*, sure that I just heard my name spoken. Turn around and face the empty room behind me ... "Chrissy?"
Decide that I'm not quite comfortable with the door to the pitch-black laundry standing open across the room. Giving in to my childish old ways of making sure the stairwell light is on before I flood the downstairs into darkness. Walking up a darkened staircase has always sat uncomfortably with me.
But this podcast, right off the bat, was not scary. After the initially pleasant surprise of learning that the starring couple of the original movie are the hosts, anybody with more than a passable intelligence and a fondness for the supernatural (oxymoron? No, fuck off!) will quickly realise what a phoned-in, surface level, cheap, sensational load of disingenuous garbage this obnoxious podcast is going to be. (That was eight adjectives in a single sentence, by the way).
Its very entrance is hammy and inauthentic. Following the lame and overly dramatic introduction of boilerplate spooky music, demon noises, screaming, horror tropes, Micah and Katie are personable for about ten seconds. Then it's straight to stupid questions that belie one of either two things: either they are absolutely clueless about their subject ("So, what is possession? Because, you know, like, all I think about is, The Exorcist, green puke, spinning heads, blah, blah, blah"), or they are being children's entertainer levels of condescending, probably correctly assuming most of their listeners will be idiots who think Hollywood trash like Paranormal Activity is anything close to realistic.
To be honest, I feel like it's even a bit of both. Micah might say he's a student of and enthusiast for the paranormal, but throughout the podcast, as he interviews his so-called "expert" guests, he consistently reveals himself to be confused about what exactly - or even if - he believes.
Katie plays the budding psychologist who is sceptical until she is exposed to anything requiring the slightest suspension of disbelief, ultimately serving as little more than a sounding board for Micah. Yet, despite apparently knowing little about the subject, she seems well-versed in all the stories (supposedly true, but who knows?) that pertain to ghosts, possession and exorcism. You can't play the empty vessel, Peggy-Sue like character for the uninitiated to identify with, and then straight up pull knowledge and anecdotes out of your ass without seeming fake.
And it's just the way they talk to each other. It's all positive vibes and rubbing each other's egos with nice platitudes and enthusiastic ejaculations (yes ...), interspersed with sensational, teenage-level stories which themselves are complimented with cheesy voice acting that is jarring to put it nicely. Many a time, they jump back into the 1930s or somewhere thereabouts, sometimes even the nineteenth century, and yet the characters in each reenactment speak like typical millennial actors in something you might watch on the SyFy channel when you're sick and too weak to even reach for the damned remote.
I am aware that my negative and ranty review has so far focussed only on the people hosting it. And yes, this would seem a tad bit petty and personal rather than anything objectively valid. But I cannot help the fact that, for me, the personalities of the hosts and their presentation style immediately rubbed me the wrong way. If I were to lower myself to sharing one more personal gripe, it would be the way they talk to and about each guest. Aside from the Catholic priest, with whom they are unsurprising standoffish, they act like a couple of doped-out hippies. Micah could not be more excited to welcome each guest if he literally creamed in his pants upon announcing their names. And then when the interviews are over, Katie almost without fail waxes into this bizarre prattle about how she just loves that person, Oh, his energy, such a beautiful person, and I love him because you love him, Micah. And I love that we were able to share in this beautiful conversation today. Just say namaste and get the orgy over with.
Moving on to the content itself ...
Well, yes, it briefly explores a number of real-life cases where someone was allegedly possessed by some sort of supernatural entity. Not all of them involve the ritual of exorcism, and some credit should be given for Micah and Katie offering a range of different examples that reflect a variety of cultures, religions, superstitions and responses to the unseen world. But, to begin with, each story is only glanced at.
We get, as mentioned earlier, some very campy soundbites to depict the scene - the actors of which seem hardly interested in giving their money's worth - and these are no more convincing than the increasingly awful sequels to the Paranormal Activity movies. Following the B-grade audio treatment, Micah or Katie will read off the most simplified, sensational version of events, with little to no critical examination of the case at hand (barring one, which I will get to shortly). Then some witch or rabbi or whatever the hell will show up and answer basic questions that do little but muddy the waters between what is real and what is just a load of self-projected malarkey, with constant recourse to a relativistic defence: "Hey, if it's real to me, or you, or them, then in a way it truly is real, even if it isn't".
To be fair, I do not wholly reject this premise, since no one person does or ever can have all the answers to life's big questions - though there are certainly many that act like they do. None of us can speak for the experiences of anyone else, which includes how their religious and/or spiritual beliefs (or lack thereof) shape their lives and interaction with the world. But at the same time, this whole "everything is reality because nothing is" non-dualist stuff too often serve as convenient whiteout against the need for more objective analysis. Like it or not, there always is an Absolute Truth buried beneath so many levels ofmaya, although neither I nor anyone else has the privilege or capacity of grasping it barring very special circumstances which are just about impossible to confirm, thus remaining a matter of personal belief. Apparently, I am a Critical Realist, which I'm fine with. It sounds kind of cool. But being one these, although I acknowledge the subjectivity of all views including mine, I cannot help being frustrated by such groundless forays into what is already a complex and abstract concept. We need to establish at least some basis of belief from which we can analyse and interpret.
The two enlightened hosts of this podcast decline to do this, and so at least appear to take everything - from sorcery to reincarnation to Judaic monsters - at face value. Which is fine - whatever; it's that kind of thing. But then, when it comes to Catholic exorcisms, which have largely been the lens through which Western moviegoers have become familiar with the subject, it suddenly becomes cool to play the sceptic. The particular case provided in representation of Catholic exorcism conveniently is not one that emphasises those big, scary, ever-diverse demons and their expulsion by holy rite, but one that picks holes in the misguided beliefs of a Catholic priest and parents of a mentally ill (not possessed) young girl.
The case of Anneliese Michel is a tragic one which reflects badly on the faith-informed decisions of those involved. There is no denying that. Nor can one deny that questions of demonic possession verses mental illness should never be taken lightly. There is a massive amount of danger in confusing the distinction, and any religious view that insists on seeing demons where there are none lends itself to high levels of delusion and manipulation. But the failed exorcism of Anneliese Michel and the hosts' virtue-signalling over how angry they are that the Church would sanction such a practice is extremely misleading and hypocritical.
Nothing should be spared the prying blade of scepticism if it makes bold claims that impact people who believe in them. But when that scepticism is employed selectively - as it is here, solely for the sake of challenging Christian teachings - and is bolstered by an already biased framework that seeks to focus only on the negatives, then you get this shit. And I do just find the hypocrisy a bit too much to stomach. That these fools, whose stupid movie franchise has gone out of its way to both sensationalise and encourage meddling with the demonic, would decide to then question the very existence of demons and even spirits because nothing is less cool than giving credence to Catholicism. We've just spent hours listening to you go on and on about all this paranormal stuff. Now you're trying to wriggle out of acknowledging such things because they happen correspond with Catholic teaching about sin and the nature of evil.
I don't know, man. It just annoyed me. I was already hating the podcast long before they set out to portray my religion as a creepy cult of deluded lunatics. I had already known that it was probably going to get one star from me. This stuff at the end, and the unpleasant taste it left in my mouth, simply pulled it further down. Say, more of a zero-star affair.
Fucking terrible.
* My personal favourites, for their music and just eerie atmosphere: The Sixth Sense (James Newton Howard), The Gift (Christopher Young), The Changeling (Rick Wilkins), The Others (Alejandro Amenábar), Alien (Jerry Goldsmith), Pet Sematary (Elliot Goldenthal), Salem's Lot (Harry Sukman).
February 3, 2025
For this podcast, which I essentially take to be a movie tie-in marketing tool for Paramount Pictures, starring the stars of the first film, to reinvigorate the franchise, I found myself surprised that the podcast was truly based on documented cases of possession, analyzed by real experts (I googled them: they're for real). Way better than to make a series of fictional stories. I enjoyed it and learned a bit too.
May 19, 2025
Despite the fact that Audible lists this as an audio book in their app, and review sites like this one position this as a book to read and review, it is not. This is a podcast through and through. It's not bad, but there is significant room for improvement. Ignoring the fact that the hosts are stars within the "Paranormal Activity" franchise, they are good/interesting hosts because of their backgrounds and their beliefs. Unfortunately, this podcast wastes too much time on (sometimes) telling the same story twice, and basically holding add spots for the "Paranormal Activity" films. This takes away time from the conversations with experts in the field - which is the most interesting part of this podcast.
2.5
2.5
August 9, 2025
Such a waste of time I couldn’t even finish the first episode it was just so unbelievably boring and fake. Micah was extremely annoying to listen to.
If you’re a fan of the series or even “true” paranormal stories this is not what you’re looking for.
If you’re a fan of the series or even “true” paranormal stories this is not what you’re looking for.
April 9, 2025
It was a podcast style interview with various people. its was kind of interesting but it was hard to listen to cos everyone just talked over each other.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews