The Haunting of Fox Hollow Farm

Advertised as a documentary this is an hour long feature about real life killer Herb Baumeister.

The first half gives you a background of Baumeister and the murders committed, the second turns to a night vision filled paranormal investigation much like Most Haunted (2002).

The trouble is I don't believe any of it. Though it's supposed to be a real documentary it all felt very contrived. And the second half, well alike Most Haunted I believe it's a combination of fake & desperation.

I simply couldn't take this seriously as a documentary and from a movie standpoint it's not even on the scale.

Boring, lifeless, faux documentary about subject matter that deserves real attention.

The Good:

Based on an interesting true story

The Bad:

Many interview segments are repeated

I doubt every single seconds authenticity

More ghost hunter nonsense

Recently my friend got me one of those $5, 20 horror movie packs that you might find at K- mart; Well this film happened to be in it. The title was deceiving as I was wanting a film like "The Messageners" as country farm houses with ghosts are a turn on for me horror wise. But the film itself was very creepy and spooky to say the least.The whole story is about many murders that took place in Indianapolis, IN in the late to mid-90's and the serial killer behind all of them. Both Paranormal investigations are done and as well federal investigations throughout. You are also told the events of what happened very well If you happen to see this film it's definitely worth a watch!

The Haunting of Fox Hollow Farm (2011)

** (out of 4)

Director Dan T. Hall takes us to one of the most haunted areas in Indiana. This property was formerly owned by a serial killer and many people claim that his victims still haunt the land. A group of psychics and paranormal investigators visit the property in hopes of discovering who exactly is there.

THE HAUNTING OF FOX HOLLOW FARM is pretty typical for the current trend of ghost hunter type programs. This documentary clocks in at 67-minutes and gives us a brief history of the serial killer and then we get into the actual hauntings. For the most part none of what we see is all that creepy and perhaps it's just me but all the EVP stuff is just rather silly and usually makes me laugh more than anything else. It's not just this documentary but whenever I see people using the EVP to capture voices it just makes me roll my eyes because I personally can't hear anything yet these people use it to hear all sorts of words and phrases. There's nothing overly bad with this documentary but at the same time there's nothing good either.

I don't say that lightly, and I've watched thousands and thousands of movies, good and bad. I'm a frequent buyer of those 20-movies-for-$5 packs and actually like a lot of them, so I grade them pretty easy -- I'm not expecting Kurosawa out of a film like this, so I'm very lenient.

But, damn, dude.

This was so badly made I don't see how anyone did it without *applying* themselves to screwing it up. The editing is completely and utterly incompetent. I cannot think of any editing that's worse. It is, literally, like watching a TV whose remote is in the hands of a cranked-up channel surfer with a half-second attention span. And it's frustrating because the material itself was interesting... it's just completely ruined by the editing technique. All the flow of the narrative is destroyed. Stories are joined and left mid-sentence to go to part of a line from another story. Half the time we aren't given a clue as to who the person talking is or what they're referring to. Segments -- most of them irrelevant in the first place -- are repeated over and over like sampling in a rap song. Information about the serial killer is intercut with ghost-hunting stuff, wrecking the narrative flow of both.

It's like trying to read a book while someone constantly yanks it out of your hands.

After watching the whole thing I still have very little idea about what this serial killer actually did, or what "haunting" events led these ghost hunters to investigate the place (other than one sighting of a "guy in a red shirt with no legs" - that's looped a few times). The viewer is simply not given sufficient information on anything.

And the ghost-hunters are goofy, trying to scare themselves with a lot of "did you hear that?" b.s., jumping at every shadow and trying to pretend there are words in the EVP nonsense. (I've gone on Halloween expeditions with "real" ghost-hunters before, and they're hilarious about trying to make something out of EVP static, so this is not unique just to this film). Nothing really happens, and it's not "spooky" at all. A narrator comes in with some clumsy poetry to try to make it seem profound, but... nothing freaking happened, dude. NOTHING.

I was more than willing to play along in hopes of some scares. I watch A Haunting, which covers similar stories (and for a similar budget - man, that's a cheap show), and it's hokey but it's entertaining. It's not the budget's fault. I'm not sure about the source material -- maybe there's not much to the Fox Hollow story to begin with -- but I wanted to be interested in it. Unfortunately, this film gives the situation no reason to be spooky, because it hasn't provided the viewer with any real background info or solid story to follow, just half-snippets that may have been leading somewhere before, oops, we cut away from them again because that person was talking for more than two seconds and Mr. Hall just couldn't stand it. There'll suddenly be stuff about "we found the body on the beach..." and then, zap, we're off to something else before we find out what body, who they were, how they were killed, ANYTHING.

The editing makes me wonder if Dan T. Hall has ever actually SEEN a movie or even heard a story. It's like someone took him off a desert island where he was born, gave him a basic description of what editing is - i.e. "putting segments of video together" -- and he just said, "Oh, yeah, I can do that!" and then went at it with all the fury of attention-deficit-disorder driving him. You literally could toss film into a blender, chop it up, then tape it back together in the dark and have a better chance at creating something coherent. It's like watching a toddler play with a light switch for an hour.

I'm bewildered by this thing. I wasn't exactly bored (fortunately it's only a little over an hour), but was amazed by how poorly it was made. There are no filmmaking instincts on display here at all, I mean, not even rudimentary. I have to wonder if it's not some prank on us, some "you people are idiots, so here, I bet you'll even sit through this" act of spite.

If you're ever going to make a documentary, please watch this one first, and then don't do *anything* the way it's done here.

I'm a huge lover of true crime, a huge lover of documentaries, & I hate to be so harsh but this has got to be the absolute worst documentary I have ever watched in my life.

I can not believe this has made it onto Amazon prime.

I feel like an ADHD nightmare while I was hoping to feel at least a tad creeped out.

Anyone in the world who is considering watching this - please don't. Read about the story, watch an episode of literally anything else involving this case.

It's not even one of those laughable bad does - it is just straight up poorly done in every single way.

It feels like a group of kids had to do this as a school project & they most definitely would have failed.