New Reviews

‘The Dooms Chapel Horror’ Starts with a Bang Before Falling to Pieces (Review)

Written by: Matt Molgaard

Directed by: John William Holt

Cast: Bill Oberst Jr., Austin Madding, Abby Murphy

Well, I finally found a movie as strange as Phantasm. Like Don Coscarelli’s insanely weird cult classic, John William Holt’s The Dooms Chapel Horror attempts the same approach: throw 15 different and random horrific ideas into a massive cauldron, and stir away until it comes together to make some strange (even if flimsy) degree of sense.

Unlike Coscarelli’s Phantasm, The Dooms Chapel Horror isn’t going to be a classic, and it isn’t going to win over too many fans. Because unlike Coscarelli’s film, it’s a dreadfully amateur production that falls apart after the first act.

It’s unfortunate, because the first 20 or 30 minutes are really quite engaging. The film opens with a look at the healthy, hometown hero Ryan Cole working on his farm, hunting, being social – he’s the typical all American small town stud – the hero of high school football, the one guy in a one horse town guaranteed to be special and move on to big things. Until an accident on the farm leaves him in a heap of shredded flesh, blood, brain and bone. All because his little brother, Kyle wouldn’t put down his camera and lend a hand.

Or so we’re supposed to think.

The fact that Kyle feels some guilt over his brother’s passing feels normal and accurate, but the manner in which the town turns on him after the accident isn’t quite as normal. But we don’t see the torment that follows Kyle through his teenage years, because we leap ahead 10 or 15 years, where a grown Kyle is being filmed for a documentary. The purpose of the documentary is never clearly illustrated, and neither are Kyle’s motivations for leaving his new home – in the big city – for a return to the small town that left him a cracked shell of his once innocent former self.

That’s where all the promise detonates with an underwhelming pop and an unraveling of logic.

Back in Kyle’s little hometown everything goes haywire. There’s a cult that live out in the woods… but we don’t see any member of the cult outside of the leader and what seems to be his son… until the final five or 10 minutes of the movie. Everyone in the town save for a friend or two seem to hate Kyle and still blame him for his brother’s death. There’s some form of monster roaming about in the woods. We learn that Kyle made some form of “deal with the Devil” so to speak, basically assembling a list of everyone who ever tormented him, a list that he takes to Jordan, the leader of the cult. Those people end up dead, but not by Jordan’s hand…

I don’t even know how to continue on with my breakdown of the film. That’s not even the entirety of the strangeness… it just… keeps going. And then there’s the wretched execution of the flick. It opens in found footage format, then transitions into mockumentary, and continues to bounce back and forth between the two. That’s a method we’ve seen executed in a handful of excellent films, most noteworthy may be Carlo Ledesma’s criminally underrated 2011 offering, The Tunnel.

Now, back to the misfiring: apparently somewhere along the way director Holt seems to forget that he needs to justify the filming format in believable fashion. Suddenly there are cameras everywhere. As the second act winds down and the third gets moving it seems everyone in the film has a camera either in their hand, affixed to a gun, or attached to their persons, somehow… despite the fact that the vast majority have absolutely nothing to do with the making of the “documentary.” There are even random “deer cams” and “field cams” located out in the woods that everyone is so terrified of entering because there’s an enormous monster hanging out somewhere. Who had the pair to go out and set these cameras up, and are they all operated remotely, exclusively? It’s all so weird it’s hard to wrap my head around it.

If we’re going to continue talking weird, we’ve obviously got to talk about the “monster” in the woods, as well. Is it a big foot? Is it a killer tree? We don’t know because we never actually see it. We see a split second of what appear to be teeth, then a split second of what appears to be an enormous (far, far bigger than those teeth) tree-like… hand? Foot? I don’t know what the hell it was, to be honest with you. The special effects are practical… but they’re just old school H.G. Lewis style blood and guts, for the most part, which is fine and respectable, but there’s certainly nothing to brag about with the “monster” because it literally has about 1.25 seconds of screen time, in the dark. No, I’m not joking.

The positives of the film are few and far between, but they certainly deserve a nod of appreciation. For one, Bill Oberst Jr. brings his patented creepiness and abundant confidence to the role of the cult leader. No matter the size of the production, Oberst Jr. always gives it his all. That, I can appreciate. I can also tip the hat to virtual unknown Austin Madding, who plays Kyle with all he’s got. Abby Murphy delivers her lines with passion, despite being given little to really work with. I suppose the cast as a whole step up to at least try to create a memorable film… it’s unfortunate that the technical faults are so glaring.

I’ve got to point out another oddity. Having wrapped the previous paragraph, curiosity led me to make a quick scan of other reviews of the film, and they’re perplexing. Bloody Disgusting praised the hell out of the pic, calling it “exceptional small town horror” before awarding it a 3.5/5 star rating. lets their readers know that “in the bottomless sea of found footage films it’s difficult to find ones that are made with such passion,” (I feel sorry for the wealth of awesome found footage films they’ve clearly missed) before also rewarding it a 3.5/5 star rating. labeled it a “must see.” Horror Society gifted it a near perfect 9 out of 10 score. It’s hard to find a site that didn’t deem the movie an awesome affair.

What movie did these critics watch? It was quite clearly not the same film that myself, my wife and a close friend just checked out. Because my wife and my friend, they totally and completely checked out by the midway point (technically speaking, my wife nodded off), and I would have certainly done the same had I not hung on for the purpose of writing this review. And all that comes from a genuine fan of Bill Oberst Jr. (I still love ya, Bill), who really, really wanted to enjoy this picture.

I understand that this was a passion project for John William Holt, but technically speaking it’s an utter mess. On top of the issues I’ve already pointed out (if you watch film with an analytical eye the inconsistencies in format alone will drive you up a wall) there are poor transitions, a shaky (at very, very best) script, an inconsistent sound mix and a radically erratic pace. The movie starts on an explosive note, becomes muddled, fumbling all over itself, attempts to regain its footing and finally crumbles to pieces during what should be the most gratifying portion of the picture. I’m bummed to say it, but the best thing about The Dooms Chapel Horror is the beautiful vintage poster.

Rating: 1.5/5


About The Overseer (2283 Articles)
Author of Say No to Drugs, writer for Blumhouse, Dread Central, Horror Novel Reviews and Addicted to Horror Movies.

2 Comments on ‘The Dooms Chapel Horror’ Starts with a Bang Before Falling to Pieces (Review)

  1. Matt,

    I always enjoy your reviews -thank you for taking the time to watch DCH and for the shout.

    Your comments on found footage echo my own frustrations: inevitably there is that frame or that angle that the camera just loves but the POV can’t be justified. My personal preference is conventional cinematic storytelling, especially when there’s a good story to be told, as here.

    We soldier on. Thanks for all you do to help indie films keep on being made..


    Bill Oberst Jr.


    • I think that’s one of the many reasons you’re always going to have a LOT of fans, and are always going to be a sought after performer, Bill – you not only take the time to read what fans think of your work, you always keep it completely real and just tell it as you see it. You’ve read enough of my reviews of your stuff to know I’ll always tune in just on the strength of your name and my respect for your unreal work ethic and consistency as a professional.

      The truth is I hate to watch a movie that you know – that you can just FEEL – has a lot of real passion invested in it, but lacks the technical refinement to reach its real potential. And that was this movie. I think it meant a lot to John, but I think he got in over his head the moment he decided he was going to take that found footage/handi-cam approach. I KNOW John is smart enough to know how INSANELY hard it is to REALLY make an amazing found footage flick I honestly believe they make for even bigger challenges than more traditional filming methods, regardless of the common misconception that directors make these movies because they’re “easier” to make.

      I wish John has taken a different approach, even if it meant cutting a few MORE corners.

      That said, I hope he reads this review and just thinks about some of the things that us weirdo horror addicts really see when we watch film. A lot of us are nutjobs, but a lot of us also have some form of technical experience or schooling and we can understand some things because we can look at a project from the outside looking in, without our hearts draped over the production and not COMPLETELY ignorant to what’s happening from a technical standpoint.

      I’ve got a little bit of schooling under my belt myself, and I spent 15 years as an active, recording and performing musician. I understand sound and the technical process involved in editing recordings of all different sorts. I’m certainly not a true master of any singular craft, and I’m certain that right now John can make a MUCH tighter film than I can, but I’ve been around for a while and I’ve done a few things that do help me to look at film in a way that maybe some others don’t. And when I write a review like this, it’s not to make anyone feel like shit (to be honest, I typically feel pretty shitty after writing them, but I made a promise to myself long ago to always be honest – with filmmakers, with fans, with actors, with myself, and hope that it benefits someone down the line), it’s to hopefully offer some advice from a somewhat informed fan’s perspective.

      It’s to let guys like John know that hey, I see what you’re trying to do here but for me, as a fan, my opinion is that there are misfires happening here, and it’s my opinion that these are the areas that need improvement. I just hope John can read that and say, hey, I can respect the guys who love my films, and I can respect the guys that don’t. Maybe this guy was on to something here and maybe I’ll try and keep that in mind in the future. Because – John, if you read this review, and this response to Bill’s comment – I wish you nothing but success in the future, and I’m a believer that every time we try something, every time we DO something, we take something away from the experience, and we improve in some way.

      I’m in love with horror, and that means I’m in support of anyone of like mind, whether they’re involved in the business or not, a true master, or a guy who’s still learning a lot on the job. You can bet I’ll watch the next film, and I’ll do so with higher expectations but a much deeper respect.

      This wasn’t your masterpiece, but there’s passion in this movie that tells me you can and likely will one day give us that masterpiece.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: