PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

arielshannon09 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. :)

grumblinggargoyle First off, I usually love documentaries, and am fascinated by the story of H. H. Holmes. My partner is always teasing me about watching 'boring' shows, and how I tend to become so transfixed by what's being portrayed that I never notice things like one of the cats eating off my plate or drinking from my glass. This documentary did NOT live up to expectations. Honestly, it played out like the kind of show that gives documentaries a bad name--the kind my old schools usually showed when the class had been too rowdy. The main problem I had with it, I think, was the narrator. He had a great voice, but spoke completely impassively--not much fluctuation in tone or volume, and with the kind of dry manner that gives the impression he was completely bored out of his skull. As mentioned in the title, this put me straight to sleep, TWICE. Other than the dull, dry manner of narration, the film was pretty good. It had lots of interesting information that I'd not found in my online reading about Holmes, and I loved how they followed along the floor-plans whenever they could, in relating incidents. Holmes was a complete nut-job, to say the least, and even my partner was disturbed by some of what Holmes did--Eric isn't easily disturbed. So overall, it was a good film, but probably won't be watching it again unless I have an early start the next day and can't sleep.

Der_Schnibbler Despite being America's "first" (or at least first known) serial killer, H.H. Holmes doesn't ring a bell the way the names of other well-known sociopaths' do. So there isn't too much to go on, and this documentary, I suppose, is all we're going to have for a while as far as film sources go.I cannot judge how factual or historically accurate the documentary was, it being my first exposure to this man, but there are a few comments I'd like to make on it purely as a documentary.Firstly, the narrator is the best part. Great voice. The score is also good. Pictures and newspaper headlines are used very well. The narrated excerpts from Holmes' own writing succeed in bringing this creature to life.What distracted heavily were two things.Firstly, the unnamed (or perhaps I missed his name) guy sitting in the room with the too-bright background (in comparison to the shots from which his scenes would cut) who always ended his sentences with a rising inflection? Do you have any earthly idea how irritating and distracting that is? It nearly makes you want to pull your hair out?The second was the so-called criminal or forensic psychologist or whatever ludicrous title they chose to give him. A round-faced, over- excited, bug-eyed little man who, instead of giving us authoritative, factual, and insightful commentary on Holmes' character, acts more like a two-bit talk show host. Get this MORON out of there. Why in the world would the director, who certainly spent no small amount of time and money on this documentary, intentionally mar it with this nincompoop?Sometimes scenes would cut from the first guy mentioned above (maybe it was the director himself) to the clown guy, and it would just make you insane.I never understand why people who put in sweat and money into making a film would not have the sense to at least avoid such glaringly obvious errors. Did no one think to tell that dude, "STOP ending every sentence like it's a god damned QUESTION!"? Did no one think, "No, better not hire some weirdo charlatan type who claims to be a forensic expert. We can certainly find a knowledgeable person who will lend insight and capture viewers' interest." Why did no one think of this? Why? What a shame.Special mention is due for the unnamed lady who all too briefly appeared once or twice and professionally, intelligently gave us great information on police and forensic techniques of the late 19th century. It should have been her instead of that clownish dolt.

Michael_Elliott H.H. Holmes: America's First Serial Killer (2004) *** (out of 4)Good, 64-minute documentary taking a look at H.H. Holmes, the Chicago doctor who has become known as American's first true serial killer. Throughout the documentary we learn about Holmes early life including his alternate names and then we get into details about his time at the University of Michigan where he got to "act out" his fantasy of working with dead bodies. This leads to him getting a job in Chicago and then building a castle where he would put acid baths, secret pathways, torture devices and this would become the final resting place to an unknown amount of people. Director and writer John Borowski does a pretty good job at telling the story of this madman and he does this by voice-over narration as well as interviews with experts on the subject. It's clear that no one will ever really know how many people he slaughtered but I just found it rather amazing that no one suspicions were ever risen to the point to where they'd at least take a look at this guy. I mean, not only did he kill people but he would then sell their skeletons to medical schools. It was also fascinating learning about the 1893 Columbian Exposition where apparently fifty people went missing but again no one can tell how many were at the hands of Holmes. I think the weakest thing in the documentary are the reenactments, which really weren't all that impressive. Still, that's just a minor complaint as I'm sure many people might be interested in the subject and will find that there hasn't been too many looks at him. Overall this documentary is worth watching if you're interested in hearing about the subject.