H.H. Holmes: America's First Serial Killer (2004)

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

I love this documentary. It's beautifully done, and there's something about the narrators voice that fits so perfectly with the entirety of the film. (Sorry, I know how cheesy that sounds) I wish there was more information about H. H. Holmes, but that's on history not the makers of this documentary. Anyway, throw it on and give it a go. I hope you like it just as much as I do. :)

...at least they didn't have to sit through this piece of garbage!Take an interesting subject and present it with the directorial finesse of a mentally retarded 12-year-old on Quaaludes who's just been handed a video camera and you'll come up with something pretty close to this pseudo-documentary. I'm not sure what was more entertaining, the fake mustaches in imminent danger of falling off during the reenactments or trying to count the number of different ways the director tried to use the same three pictures of the perpetrator.And let's not forget the 1,914 uses of the closing-iris-fade-to-black effect (not sure what it's called but if you managed to get through at least 10 minutes of this cinematic abortion then you'll know what I'm referring to.) Perhaps the best use of "H.H. Holmes - America's First Serial Killer" would be as a primer on how *not* to edit a movie.Look up "amateurish" in the dictionary and it'll lead you to HHH-AFSK. Those with in interest in the exploits of the good doctor would be best served to read Erik Larson's "The Devil in the White City" or, at the very least, to look him up on Wikipedia.Ugh...I think I need to go take a shower.

Alright. Not much to say, other than READING is far more entertaining than this horribly narrated and presented documentary is. I will just get right down to what wasn't good about it. And there wasn't that much bad about it. It's just that the falling points to the film are constant and never expand nor decrease.The narrator to me was like an older Ben Stein telling me all about the 19th century. I really don't like listening to Ben Stein attempt to educate me. The information is also poorly presented. For example, a big part about Holmes was his building he designed. Now they do have a segment on it, but they really don't emphasize (enough in my opinion) how he really went about it. They did a sad little black and white RE-ENACTMENT of a innocent victim going through the labyrinth and being caught and placed inside the trap-walls. But it seriously just belittled Holmes.The chronology was poorly paced and just didn't have much direction to it. I found myself wondering what was pacing through Holmes as his evil began to really take part.Now I understand that Holmes existed before modern science and psychology, so everything about who he was, how he was, and all of that is pure assumption. But we have a thing called educated guess and I don't think anyone will be upset about several educated guesses to breathe some life into the film. This was not done at all.The entire film seemed to drag on. The first thirty minutes felt like two hours. Literally. I was hoping that it would pick up so pace towards the end. But it actually just slowed down.Overall, this film is very educational, but I would seriously recommend having some background knowledge first. I would seriously expect this film to be on a shelf at some high school; an idle threat to force the students to watch and take notes on the film. Because it's extremely dry on a very INTERESTING subject. Honestly though. You will thank me and yourself for picking up a book or essay vice watching this dry cardboard cut out of HHHolmes.

Uninspiring so-called "Documentary" which was patched up by a pseudo-filmmaker, complete with insipid, low budget "retellings" that don't excite or allow for any valid renderings of facts. It is amazing that this even attempted to analyze the "killer" so directly, who was portrayed erroneously in many of the segments. Historical accuracy is replaced by slander, innuendos, assumptions, half hearted guesses and mind readings. The "experts" resemble boisterous and lonely people who parade before the camera without any insight and pretend to know how 'murderers' operate. At best this is a laughable attempt at horror, at worst, a mockery of objective film-making. Everything about this production is tedious, including the t-shirt order address on the DVD.