Let's be realistic.

Good concept, poorly executed.

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

I vaguely remember watching this on Netflix, I believe, quite some time ago. It was that memorable that I watched it again, remembering it after most of it was done. It was...all right. The acting was better than expected, but the music was quite annoying. The interactions between the characters was believable, except for the jarring, one-note characterization of the Jesus freak. I've known some holy rollers in my time, and though they can be annoying, they're not nearly as nasty as this one was.What I can't understand is how it could be considered a 'found footage film'. The 'found footage' comprises perhaps fifteen percent of the total film. No real jump scares, unless you're very nearly asleep and the loud noises make you jump, like they did me. The little girl was, perhaps, the only really sympathetic character in a film full of veiled hostility. The characters were vaguely hostile to each others' chosen professions, and the environment itself was hostile. All in all, an okay film with a 'message'.

The budget doesn't really make a movie. A film could be bad in almost every aspect but still have some saving graces that make it entertaining. "Death of a Ghost Hunter" is NOT one of those examples.The only thing that could have saved this movie is a decent story and one that stays completely relevant to its title but "DoaGH" doesn't do that. The story tries way too hard to make a twist ending that the actual established subject of the film suddenly takes a backseat and the film looks like it is scrambling to tie up all its loose ends—this ends up giving the movie more endings than it needed. This is very evident thanks to the fact it's supposed surprise ending is painfully predictable and very lackluster.The rest of the film doesn't do much better as the editing is painful to endure and the acting is even worse. However, this is the price you pay when watching something that clearly had the budget that couldn't even pay for the pizzas that would be needed to feed the crew.

This film...this film....this film. :/ By now I'm sure you've read that the acting wasn't great. True. It seemed very unrehearsed and totally on-the-fly in most of the shots.The sound editing was horrible. (FAIL!) Very frustrating and unprofessional. One minute I'm struggling to hear the dialogue, a few seconds later I'm grabbing the remote and adjusting the volume by at least 50% because of the loud volume. It was VERY annoying to say the least. (Seriously, how can a film be edited like this?)The Story was a bit unusual - not very predictable (although some reviews her have argued otherwise) and the ending was strange. I had questions during the film, but I wont beat up the story for it. I think the film would have been better off without the cameraman and the reporter. Although the best line of the movie was from the cameraman... "From now on - I'm only doing weddings!". (I chuckled).The scenes were awkward and didn't blend or transition well for the most part, and the actors in the film didn't have very much chemistry for the viewer to feed off of. Everything seemed force-fed. In my opinion the story, the scenes, and it's players needed to breath a little bit...give it some space. It never happened. Lindsay Page was interesting. I'm still not sure what to think about her - but I was intrigued by her characters strange personality. I would liked to have seen her character become a bit more developed in the story, as she added a creepy sense of uneasiness to the whole vibe (maybe instead of the wacky ending).The simple special effects were effective, and well placed. If they'd have used more simple video camera shots - I think it would have covered up the low-end production that was so obvious from the start (as Blair Witch or Paranormal Activity did.) That's a turn-off for many who will probably never give this film a chance once it begins.The music was excellent! Simple piano notes gently tapping a well timed eerie melody. This was the best element of the film for me.:/ (Sigh......) I can understand why anyone would HATE this film....but I liked it. I think the nature of the story, combined with the music sucked me in.I do think this movie fell short of what it could have been. That's what's most disappointing.I give it a 6 out of 10, or a C-. (I feel like I shouldn't be so nice....meh....I'll consider the source.)

Yeah, well......yes...some of the acting is a textbook example of the fact that some folks got it, some folks don't.....I thought Patti was good...she is an actress, she passes basic training, and she has beautiful legs---that scene where she was writing her log in bed wearing a man's white shirt, took my breath away....yikes! The 2 other gals really don't have the chops---they are community theatre stock and oughta stay there, even tho the journalist gal certainly has the sex factor going for her.....the guy, the videographer, he was OK......he delivered his lines as if they were the first time he was saying them, and seemed natural enough.The story was good....very interesting....and maybe I'm a dullard, but the major plot point of the "religious expert" and her origin escaped me and was a surprise at the end. I enjoyed the film, overall, and the blurred image effects were creepy....we are overdue for a major film about these cheesy TV ghosthunters getting keel-hauled by something very far beyond entertainment, legend and speculation.BTW.....the special effects were SPOT-ON......admit it.....the little girl peaking around the door freakin' nailed me.......