Hollows Grove (2014) User Reviews

Terrible Acting, Decent Script

[howeliesel · 5/10 · 9 September 2015]

The acting is pretty bad. The guy who plays Chad is the best of the lot I'd say. Matt Doherty is up there in the absolute worst horror movie actors I've seen. I actually looked him up on IMDb just to see who he was and what other acting jobs he'd gotten, which is when I decided to leave a review. There were a couple scenes where I laughed out loud from the absurdity of his acting.

The plot and script are decent. Overall, if it's a rainy day, you've blown through everything on Netflix that looks good to you, and you have nothing else to do, give it a look. There are some okay jump scares and a few creepy moments. Lance Henriksen was a pleasant surprise. It's always interesting to see where he'll pop up.

Just OK.

[Patient444 · 5/10 · 23 October 2014]

Yet another movie trying to take advance of the presence of this God of cinema called Lance Henriksen, putting him almost on the cover but not so much on the screen. Don't know why he puts up with this, he can and always will do better than this!

Now about the movie: I've seen too many like this. Nothing new out of production, acting, plot, scares, ideas, only difference between movies like this or SxTape, Grave Encounters and so many others simply consist on the director's decision or sometimes on the length of the film. Here, they kept it short, I do appreciate quality over quantity but as said they brought absolutely nothing new. Reason to recommend it? Only to pass the time if you are in the dying need of a time killer.

No point in saying more than needed, watch it, don't watch it, it all comes up to you. If you do so, expect the expected, you'll get just that. Another typical found footage film, with a crew going inside an abandoned hospital where strange things begin to happen. Ba da dumb!

Cheers!

Actually, pretty good . . .

[mwidunn-95-631875 · 5/10 · 1 August 2015]

I saw this for free on Hooplah. It's actually an okay "found- footage" film, albeit a bit too short. The acting's good: There's great camaraderie amongst the cast which really helps sell some of the humor. Lance Henriksen makes a relatively brief cameo as the "spooky effects"-guy, and is -- of course -- awesome to watch (whatever someone might think of his film choices). The camera-work is good: neither too jumpy nor too focused like in a real camera shot. The special effects are what they are given that -- I'm assuming -- the film was probably given a paltry budget.

The conceit of the whole movie is that the F. B. I. is using the footage to get help in solving the murders of the crew of a paranormal T. V. show, called S. P. I. T. (the "Spiritual and Paranormal Investigative Team" . . . or, something like that). That part was kind of stupid. Spit?! I mean, . . . c'mon. I failed to see any humor in it, if that were the intent. The F. B. I. connection was also, in my humble opinion, totally unnecessary. It added nothing to the story and even confused it. Why was the Bureau involved at all? We know that the members of the crew were killed . . . but, were they missing, too? And, would their disappearance have even mattered, when the tapes showed their deaths? (I thought, the F. B. I. looked for missing people whom they hoped to be ALIVE.) At the end, the F. B. I. person reveals some screen (?)/box (?)/whatever, that only confused things further. I won't say what it is, because I honestly am still not sure what it was meant to be. Anyways, it felt like a moment of amateurism on the part of the writer, like: "Hey, let's throw in some weird stuff at the end to creep out the audience."

It just so happens that some guy is also following the crew around in order to film them for his documentary. So, having two cameras allows for some more possibilities: In other words, the documentary guy catches things that the "paranormals" don't while they tape their canned script to their own cameraman. But, it also has the effect of making the film feel more like a movie, rather than an authentic "found footage" experience. That might annoy some people.

There's no real blood, guts, or gore, except for a rather explicit throat-cutting. The film relies more on atmosphere, on which it pretty much delivers.

The film has a lot of missed opportunities. I do wish that it had done more -- a lot more -- with all the possibilities. I mean, you've got a place where: children were brutalized and molested . . . multiple suicides had occurred . . . doctors performed excruciatingly painful experiments on the inmates . . . a little seven year-old psychopath would go around slitting people's throats . . . and, a disbelieving film crew from a paranormal T. V. show that thinks it's all a bunch of laughs and "wind-blowing-through-cracks- in-the-walls." I mean: Where do you start?

It's a comfortable, easy film to watch. It's not boring . . . but, just don't expect too much.

Just read review and forget this film.

[alamana-46684 · 1/10 · 25 January 2021]

Hello everyone, I don't speak English very well, but I was not too lazy to even go to the translator. Looking for a super low budget version of Grave Encounters? So this is it. The film absorbed all the disadvantages, weaknesses at the same time losing the main advantages of Grave Encounters - the atmosphere of horror, appropriate humor flowing first into a thriller and then into a full-fledged horror. The director of this film, as well as the rest of the crew with the exception of Lance Henriksen, did not give anything worth watching either before or after this film. Who gave the money for this? Why does this even have one star at all? This is an excellent guide to how not to make films, how not to write a script, how not to act and how not to make scenery. Don't waste time on this movie, especially if you are a horror fan (like me) because you will experience pain and shame from this movie.

Hollow camcorder.

[fedor8 · 3 August 2020]

The last 20-30 minutes aren't scary (because scary isn't what found-footage is good at), but they are entertaining. The trouble is that getting there is a bit boring. The first half-hour offers nothing, unless you consider cheesy improv by a third-rate acting team interesting.

The jokes are pretty rotten and the Indian guy especially so annoying that you almost want to beg the ghosts to get on with it and start with him as their no 1 priority. There is nothing more embarrassing than an unfunny actor playing the comedian. Comic reliefs of this kind aren't reliefs but a burden.

Unlike millennial movie-goers, I am not a nit-picky stickler for CGI, so I find the special-effects more than good enough. People who look hard for "flaws" in that regard should really check out some 80s horror films to see how bad that stuff was before computers changed things.

The reactions of the film-crew aren't always logical, because we're told that they're a bunch of haunted-house reality-show charlatans who don't believe in ghosts. And yet, weird things happen and yet they keep ascribing them to Henriksen, things that would require a large budget and large crew.

Nor does it make any sense that these people would allow someone to shoot a documentary about them, exposing them as cynical frauds.

Absolutely dreadful low-budget horror

[StormBaron · 2/10 · 10 April 2018]

The acting is terrible, they rely too much on jumpscares and the characters seemed to die off completely randomly. The caretaker smashed through the window with a noose around his head? How did that happen after 22 years of watching the place?

All in all a terrible film, entertaining at times, through its sheer stupidity but overall not a good film at all.

A bit like a theatrical version of ghost adventures or most haunted

[Hayden-86055 · 2/10 · 21 January 2021]

Hollow's grove is not a very good film at all, the plot is very simple, go into scary place and get scared for an hour. The acting is sub-par and the scares aren't clever, it does a decent job in places of building tension but that's it. It reminded me of those ghost hunting shows they have on the television but this time they don't bother to pretend it's real.

2/10: Poor acting and a rubbish cliched script make this an awful watch

Interesting found footage follows in the footsteps of Grave Encounters

[victoryismineblast · 7/10 · 22 October 2014]

Lance Henrikson has become a horror icon. He's protected the Antichrist, fought the Terminator, battled demons, Aliens and Predators. He's been in over 200 movies and now he's in a found footage horror movie. Too bad he only has 2 scenes.

I went into this thinking it would be along the lines of Grave Encounters, which I really like, and it sort of is. The problem is that it's missing most of the scares. Whereas Grave Encounters went right for the jugular, this one has most of the spooky stuff happening off camera (singing and whispering heard, things disappearing when an area is returned to). The setting is creepy and some genuinely frightening stuff happens near the end, but it is almost too late by then.

Hollows Grove did keep me interested throughout however and is definitely worth a watch for fans of these types of movies. 6.5/10.

One of the worst I've seen in a while.

[beavernuggetextension · 2/10 · 7 June 2021]

I will start by saying I do enjoy independent low budget horror flicks, however this is just dreadful in almost all regards. Hollows Grove is a found footage B-movie that is a blatant rip-off of Grave Encounters. It follows the same exact premise almost bit by bit. Basically a group of TV paranormal investigators go to an orphanage with a dark past to film a new episode and all hell breaks loose.

Sadly, I had hope for this film even though I knew it was a rip-off of Grave Encounters. I was hoping it would improve upon Encounter's short comings, boy was I wrong. The first problem I noticed immediately was the terrible writing. Almost all of the characters act like Beavis and Butthead, I get were supposed to hate them, but the writers went absolutely overboard. I really don't understand how I'm supposed to feel empathy for any of them when they're scumbags.

The next issue I had with this film is the terrible acting, only Lance Henriksen was some what decent and he has probably less than 4 minutes of camera time.

The script is the biggest problem, the jokes are terrible and take up most of the dialog and the scares are pretty par for the course.

Just don't waste your time with this one, I was more than disappointed. I wish people would respect the found footage subgenre more but, this is exactly why most don't. Please just watch Grave Encounters for a better found-footage horror experience.

Good

[begob · 6/10 · 26 January 2015]

This is how it should be done - mostly.

Most important is they build up characters, well played, with good humour.

The tension is built well in the hospital, but I had a problem with the documentary film because they didn't seem to be much good at producing a product they're supposed to make lots of money from.

I've seen stuff like this where the ghosts are only suggested. This one does have manifestations, maybe too much - especially with the frequent children's voices. The night vision kids were good, and the skull girl.

A few mis-steps. The caretaker's death was not believable. They ran upstairs to immediately figure out they needed to go down. And they had to caption on screen that it was Tim's camera at the climax of his story.

For the genre it's good, but nothing new.

Bog Standard.

[suzannebainbridge · 3/10 · 23 November 2022]

I think all of the budget went on paying for Lance Henriksen to appear in this film even though it was just for a couple of scenes. The production value is fine the acting for what is needed for this basic film is fine but in the end it's nothing but a pretty standard found footage film, a few jump scares, lots of noise off camera etc.

Even the classic line of "Film Everything" was used.

I'm suposed to say more to take this up to over the required character count but there really isn't much more I can say as it's just a so so film so here are some random words. Sad, boring, pointless etc etc.

Would not be disappointed if I paid for it... stay after credits

[nabeel1127 · 8/10 · 14 October 2014]

I was lucky enough to see a pre-screening of this movie, but I have to say that if I paid too see it in theaters, I wouldn't have been disappointed. For a scary movie, especially a low budget one, this is really good. Initially everybody watching it with me complained about the slow build and the fact that we were sick of the flood of "home movie" style scary movies. But this movie made up did it all very well. For starters, the home movie style isn't the same as in most movies. The camera isn't constantly running, shaking, flipping, and falling. It's steady for about 90% of the movie, and I thoroughly appreciate that. And the slow build I spoke about earlier is necessary, it helped me to settle in before it scared me. Which it definitely did. It didn't do it with crazy cheap scares or jump scenes, but with that slow build I mentioned earlier. It built the tension and then cut through it. The characters are pretty well developed and the acting is good. Nobody is going to win any Oscars for this, but I wasn't left wanting anything from the actors. Everybody played their part, and they played it well. The story is the usual "we go to a haunted place and discover it's actually haunted" but the perspective is pretty different. Though the movie was semi-predictable, it kept me and everybody I watched it with on the edge of our seats, especially near the end. My only real complaint about this movie is the beginning and end scenes with the detective. It made it seem too much like an interactive movie at Universal Studios or something. But stay after the credits, and the bad ending scene makes up for itself.

Breaks the ice ..

[InDyingArms · 7/10 · 5 January 2015]

Oh look, another paranormal sub-genred' film to look into. Most people may already be scared away by the two unlikeable facts, those being number one, this involves a team going into an abandoned area, clichés. Number two, you probably already guessed it! It's found footage. Two horror movie factors most more than likely can't stand. But does that turn this film, suddenly, into a bad one? Absolutely not. "Hollows Grove" succeeds in being a tense, creepy horror film, actually. First off, the plot is new, and actually quite interesting. Instead of taking the heavily clichéd route, that being the action of throwing this group of characters together as supposed friends with camera into this abandoned area. We actually follow a rookie cameraman of which has just joined this team of ghost hunters; the entire film sets it up to where it all seems fake; the film shows them going to mechanics and such just to prop up they're supposed "ghosts". I found it really intriguing with this pleasant change. I love how the cameraman is completely oblivious the entire time, and has / had no idea of these ghost hunters actually being fake. It was interesting to see, all this time he was built up toward believing it was all fake, until the entire team, to their surprise, got way more than they all bargained for. The plot managed to solidly execute a change toward the typical cliché - fest of which plagues the paranormal sub genre. The plot turned it around, and made it into something different, something rather pleasant. I felt as if the atmosphere in this film was quite good, you got your creepy, unnerving atmosphere that gives those unsettling vibes, for example, as soon as the crew enters the abandoned orphanage, you already feel the vibes kick in, pleasantly. Something many found footage films fail to do, for the most part. With that being said, another nice surprise that awaited in this film was the camera work. Yes, the guy holding the camera. He wasn't shaky, shaky, ALL over the place like most other films. To my surprise, the camera actually got decent shots of activity that befalls, instead of shaking all over the place when it's occurring! Finally, I felt as if the film had a heart along with it. The film, overall just seemed unique, in terms of the over all aspects of this film. It managed to be unique, and even comical it times, but successfully, and pleasantly, for the most part an eerie, dark - like influence that set the mood for the film in a very great way.

In conclusion, this film was fun. I felt as if it was a decent, solid, and even great found footage, paranormal film. It surprised me with it's unique elements, turning itself into an interesting little gem. The characters are decent, stories great, as well as plot. The entire story itself has some interesting, good, refreshing turns that paid off in the end, and the entire film has heart, giving emphasis instead of chopping to the point. I'd recommend giving this one a chance, it surprised myself, and what seems to be other reviewers' as well. It's an intriguing, great little flick, and I would recommend it to horror fans looking for a small gem. P.S! For those who do watch this film, make sure you wait the entire thing out! Sit through the credits! The film has a small trick up its sleeve..

Nothing new or that interesting

[jmbovan-47-160173 · 4/10 · 21 October 2020]

Competent found footage film. That being said, rather tired retread of situations, conflict between ghost hunter crew members, and annoying immature characters. Big names are in it minimally, for about a total of four brief scenes, so don't expect much from them.

Just hollow

[smoke0 · 27 May 2017]

I can't believe the good reviews here, the only good thing I can say about this haunted hospital mess is that it might be slightly better than that nepotistic abomination from Oliver Stone's kid and some other movie that tried way too hard for lovable characters and scares and failed on both, and that one was set in a prison hospital, so if you want to be picky then it doesn't count here. I also can't recall the titles of those movies and don't care enough to find them again, so they may actually be better than Hollows Grove.

First, the dialog the characters use for their show's narrative is so insipid, inane and uninformative that I could almost believe it was intentionally done as a statement on the stupidity of the typical reality show, but I don't know if I can give the writers that much credit, since the characters' dialog is just as bad in their interactions with each other. The film also feels like it takes forever to get anywhere, focusing too much and too long on building cliché characters who ultimately contribute nothing to the story beyond a body count.

I did wind up giving the film three stars for some of the better effects, but I think I was feeling too generous. And I won't even talk about the FBI ending, as that was bad enough to cause the entire film to lose a star, now that I think about it.

You want the same storyline? Just watch Grave Encounters again.

Worth a watch

[armadilla17 · 5/10 · 29 August 2020]

2 characters were annoying as hell Rog and Tim a little over the top childish. For what I imagine this had a super low budge but was still very well made, there is a couple scenes you could notice especially. The one with Lilah. I normally don't watch any year 2010+ with Lance Hendrickson cause most are crab but he is hardly seen, I can honestly say I got a little creeped out and I haven't been creeped out since the Conjuring first came out.

I almost stopped watching this film...

[AndyVanScoyoc · 5/10 · 2 June 2017]

I don't even like the hint of anything happening to an animal, and the first half hour of this film was almost a deal killer.

There was an incident with a cat inside the asylum.

But...it ended up being okay and fake enough to not be too upsetting and the fact that the Humane Society was on hand to monitor, redeemed the film, to a degree.

Parts of the dialogue were hilarious and I actually laughed out loud.

The dialogue was real, hip and believable. The ghost kids and creepy asylum were old, tired, clichéd and seriously, eh, but it was the typical story, so I could deal with that.

But...what killed this movie for me, was the ending.

What a useless ending and a total letdown.

Almost bad.

[noawareness · 5/10 · 19 July 2022]

Pretty terribly but not really. The main things that let it down are the terrible acting and the awful, pre and post credits scenes. The amount of sexual harassment in the first act is too much and unrealistic. That alone took me out of the whole "found footage" thing.

This is how horror movies should be done.

[chrismackey1972 · 7/10 · 21 October 2014]

Five members of a documentary crew go to a long-abandoned children's' orphanage to see if there are any ghosts. Before they get inside, they have an argument with the grounds' keeper. He doesn't want to let them inside because of "incidents" that have happened in the past. They inform him that they have permission from the owners. Grudgingly, he moves aside and lets them pass. Once inside, they begin filming in the kitchen. Shortly thereafter, the needle on their equipment starts going crazy, and pots start shaking. They think their special effects man, Bill (Lance Henriksen), rigged that to happen. When they're about to leave the kitchen a cat is slammed dead into a wall. That and other incidents that are hard to credit Bill with start making the crew's stay in the hospital very ominous. It doesn't help matters that they haven't seen him since they arrived.

I can't really say anything else without giving away spoilers. I have to be honest, I was not very interested in seeing this movie. I read a very brief synopsis of it, and when I read it took place in an old orphanage, I passed on it earlier. I was bored, so I decided to give it a chance, but I wasn't expecting much. At first, the haunts were very mild. Later, they became so much more, as did the movie. The acting was very good, as was the directing and storyline. It's not that original, because there have been many movies that take place in abandoned institutions such as hospitals and such. However, they developed fun characters - especially Julie :D I recommend this movie.

I gave this a 7-star rating. This is how good horror films should be done, and it's the first one that I've seen in a long time that I felt really impressed by. My one problem with this is that I really don't like found-footage films very much, because they say that what it is at the beginning, making it obvious everybody dies. I prefer to see that for myself as the movie plays out. Anyway, there's an added scene after the credits, so stay tuned for that.

Good to Kill Time, Not for Much Else

[Wolfclaw359 · 3/10 · 28 February 2024]

A film that looks good on paper, but doesn't quite hit the mark. That's how I'd best describe this found-footage horror film. The premise is absolutely stuff we've seen before. A videographer is tasked with the behind-the-scenes of a ghost hunters show, they're about to head out to what is considered one of the most haunted locations in the area, and the crew of charlatans plus their videographer buddy end up realizing they bit off more than they can chew once hijinks ensue.

It does not help that most of the characters have next to no actual character TO them. You have Tim (the leader who ends up not being all that great at leading), Chad (the show's ACTUAL camera guy who randomly mentions at the beginning he's a Serbian immigrant), Julie (the producer and the only woman of the group), Bill the retiree who does special effects for the show as a way to kill time, Roger the comic relief and sex pest who's always trying to go after Julie, and Howard, Tim's buddy who is supposed to do behind-the-scenes work for this particular episode. There's even a groundskeeper, Hector, who serves no purpose other than to warn the crew to stay away from the spooky orphanage and add to the film's kill count.

As for what actually goes down, it gets pretty confusing. The film begins with an FBI agent talking about the case and asks the viewer to give their input on the events. It then cuts to Tim and Howard driving out to meet Bill. A couple fake scares and an interview later, we end up meeting the rest of the crew: Chad, Roger, and Julie. Afterwards, Julie gives a debrief on the fictional Hollows Grove Orphanage where horrid conditions and kids generally going nuts causes the hospital to close in the early 1950's with all the bodies piling up.

Tim almost ends up running over a hobo with an End is Nigh sign (gee, I wonder who that's for) on the way to the orphanage. An argument ensues between the groundskeeper and the crew as he refuses to let them in. Hector relents upon Tim talking with him and the crew begins to go about their filming with Bill having gone to the second floor to begin setting up the scares. Julie mentions that the director's office is the only place that's off-limits and filming begins after a route's planned out.

Beginning in the kitchen, they come across a cat who somehow managed to get in while nobody was looking. After finding out the basement crematorium is somehow locked, they start going upstairs before the cat from before is killed by being thrown at Tim by an unseen force. After a few more spooks and even more locked doors, the gang head back downstairs only for Chad to twist his ankle falling down the stairs. Julie and Chad stay behind in the dining area while the Three Stooges go back upstairs for some more shots. Chad is killed by a possessed(?) Julie while the guys are upstairs.

Things start taking a turn for the worse as the guys find Bill who tells them they'll never get out before getting his throat supernaturally slit. The gang go downstairs after hearing Julie scream, but find neither Julie nor the corpse of Chad in the dining area. The group resolves to head to the top floor, where a 7-year-old patient was rumored to have killed every patient on that floor in their sleep, get a bit more footage, and get out. Julie reappears and begins running upstairs even though Roger warns her not to. She jumps out of the only window on the 2nd floor and isn't seen again until the end.

At this point, the last 3 crew members finally realize they should probably get out of dodge, but by that point, it's already too late. The trio moves to try and find an exit on the top floor as the front door is locked and the rest of the windows they've seen are boarded up. More scares ensue and the gang starts trying to run after Hector's hanging body ends up smashing a window. You'd think the characters would realize that may have been their best way out, but nope, they begin going down to the lower floors. Roger is killed after being thrown through a hole in the 2nd level's ceiling that was mentioned in the first run and Tim stays with Roger's body in a complete breakdown. Tim finds himself in one of the rooms in the third floor and is stabbed to death by the ghost of who I'm assuming is the killer patient. It all comes to a climax with Howard noticing the director's office is now open and finding Chad's body before being dragged into the basement and chucked into a furnace.

The film ends with the FBI agent stating that the bodies of Chad, Bill, Hector, Roger, Tim, and Howard were found and that Julie somehow used her girl power to survive the ordeal, albeit in a coma likely due to no longer being possessed. The agent mentions that some agents had gathered evidence at the scene, which is just grounds for a final jumpscare before going to credits.

Hollows Grove does what it can with a rehashed premise, but you gotta sit through quite a large chunk of needless build-up to get to anything decent. The actual scary moments are few and far between once they arrive, but the characters act SOMEWHAT realistically even though they can make some of the worst decisions known to man at times. Due to there being a special effects guy involved, you don't know what's legitimate or the ghosts beginning to mess with them until Bill (played by Lance Henriksen) ends up kicking the bucket. It's not a GOOD film, but if you're looking for a way to kill the time with some found footage schlock, this isn't godawful. Honestly, if you're looking for something with this premise, just watch Grave Encounters instead as it pulls this off better.

One of the best of the genre

[sam21462 · 7/10 · 22 October 2014]

Other reviewers have already summed up much of what can be said. It is a quite good "found footage" style horror movie. The one aspect of note that has yet to be mentioned is that there are some incredibly long, unbroken, shots. These are especially effective as the movie picks up pace. It tends to give the last 45 minutes a real haunted house at the fair feel as we follow our unfortunate cast from location to location within the building. The effects were pulled off well during these unbroken shots which very much helped with feeling that you were along for the ride. While the getting to know the characters portion at the beginning may have benefited by the cutting of a few of the sophomoric jokes the payoff is worth it as it grows from silly to creepy and then on to frantic and finally horrific.

Made me want to S.P.I.T. on the ground.........

[Osmooms-201-517112 · 2/10 · 25 July 2022]

First let me start by saying I'm not really much of a fan of the "found footage" genre in the first place. But, done right, they can produce an effective horror story with genuine scary moments.

Unfortunately, this movie is not one of those. And the blame, imo, largely lies with the script. It is so banal and childish and insipid, I wonder if this wasn't a deliberate ploy on the part of the director to get the audience to develop an intense hatred for the characters before they even got to the front door of the hospital. By the time they bully their way into the building, you're rooting for the ghosts to inflict just (if not more) pain on the S. P. I. T as they have already done to those watching this.. Seriously, I had no empathy or sympathy for any of them whatsoever.

Special effects, considering the obvious budget constraints weren't that bad, but that was pretty much the only thing that wasn't in this stinker.

Acting was dire, plot we've seen exactly before in other movies and it brought nothing fresh to the genre. And did I mention the appalling script? (Yes, I did).

A surprisingly freighting movie

[jerryvanway · 9/10 · 11 December 2015]

By the box the movie looks like it will just be another shabby found footage film but instead it is a creative, unique and freighting experience. While the writing towards the end did get a little lazy, all in all it was one of the few movies that gave me the creeps just for watching it! It did not rely on petty jump scares to get a thrill out of its audience; it's just simply creepy. I'm not sure why it has such a bad review as it is a very surprisingly scary movie! The actors aren't annoying, there are decent special effects, the camera work isn't bad and better yet the script while being a found footage film is 100% original and even funny at some points.

Glad I ignored the reviews

[sapphirre · 6/10 · 12 November 2022]

Look. This movie isn't great. It's not even good. But as a rabid found footage fan I actually enjoyed it quite a bit.

Contrary to the complaints in other reviews, the acting is only bad in a few places, particularly the very end. Elsewhere the acting actually ranges from slightly wooden but otherwise fine to genuinely good and believable (Matt Doherty being the best performer by a long shot). Your mileage may vary but I've seen plenty of films with far worse acting and I don't personally think this one is bad enough to warrant this many complaints.

Where this film really suffers is actually the scares, which don't have much of a rhyme or reason to them. If goofy trope-y scares turn you off then by all means avoid this film. If not, this film resembles Grave Encounters quite a lot and if you enjoyed that vibe you may also enjoy Hollows Grove.

Ultimately this film is not for people who aren't rabid found footage fans. If you don't normally watch this kind of film then don't bother, there are plenty of far better far more accessible FF films out there that deserve your attention more. But for fans of the genre like me, this is worth a shot.

A blatant rip-off of Grave Encounters minus everything that made Grave Encounters memorable

[NocturnalMammal · 1/10 · 3 March 2024]

Wow, talk about a groundbreaking idea... a ghost-hunting TV show set in a real haunted location. I bet no one's ever thought of that before for a movie. Hollows Grove is a snooze fest disguised as a found footage movie (more like found footage of boredom). Imagine the most annoying crew of guys you've ever seen on screen, like the Avengers if they were all jerks, exploring a spooky old orphanage and bumping into the angry ghost of little orphan kids. For 40 minutes, it's a whole lot of nothing, and then suddenly a cat jumps out and splats against the wall. The rest of the movie can't even live up to the clearly fake exploding feline scene. This movie is pretty much like one of those terrible "ghost caught on tape" videos you'd find on YouTube. The acting, The writing, The script, and the jokes are terrible, which sums up this movie. TERRIBLE!

The best part of the movie was Lance Hendrickson's buttcrack and ballsack (If you were unfortunate enough to watch this flick, you know what I'm referring to). Poor Lance Hendrickson, he got roped into this mess (Hey, even Lance has bills to pay.)