"Some people don't want to think of the terrors that exist around them in the real world. It's easier thinking all horror is fantasy, but we live in a world of horror everyday." 

As much as filmmakers make figures like Michael Myers or Jason Voorhees into familiar franchise characters, serial killers are the true boogeymen of our time and we'll never feel safe as long as we know the real deal is out there. Their deeds are inexplicable and our literature and cinema reflects our ongoing fascination with those outwardly normal beings who consider us to be their prey. One of the most heinous of America's serial killers was arguably its first: H. H. Holmes, a shrewd, calculating sociopath who stalked Chicago in the late 1800's. 

Despite the incredible nature of his crimes, Holmes has little notoriety in comparison with the likes of, say, Jack the Ripper - with whom Holmes was a contemporary of, in fact. But as much as we do know Jack, we don't know much about Holmes. While almost any serial killer you'd care to mention has had a feature film or TV movie based on their exploits, the story of Holmes has languished until now. Introducing Holmes to an audience largely unfamiliar with his story is filmmaker John Borowski with his first feature film, the self-financed documentary H. H. Holmes: America's First Serial Killer (click here for our review). 

We recently spoke with Borowski via e-mail about his film, H. H. Holmes, the next projects he may be working on, and how his interests intersect with the horror genre.   

_______________________________________________________________________

There's always been a crossover element between horror fans and true crime fans. In many horror circles, the names of Ed Gein or Ted Bundy are just as familiar as that of Freddy and Jason. Do your own interests share a similar overlap or are you primarily interested in true crime?

My interests are mainly in horror. Having a passion for horror films, it seemed a natural progression to make films on human monsters. It can be a double edged sword since there may be people who are just interested in escapist fantasy horror rather than true life horrors. 

Personally, I find true crime stories more frightening as when you leave the movie theater and remind yourself that the events actually happened and can happen to anyone at any moment. Some people don't want to think of the terrors that exist around them in the real world. It's easier thinking all horror is fantasy, but we live in a world of horror everyday - take a look at the newspapers.

What sparked your initial interest in H. H. Holmes? And why choose to make a feature on such a little known figure? Or do you think that serial killers are always a "safe bet" commercially?

While I was in college, I came across a book about Chicago criminals where they mentioned Holmes' castle of horrors. The castle fascinated me but it wasn't until I read Schechter's Depraved that I learned of Holmes' entire life of villainy. 

 Serial killers are a safe bet, but not killers from over a hundred years ago, so I knew I had to choose a subject so fascinating that people wouldn't believe it actually happened. Making Holmes, I had the chance to combine my interests in classic gothic horror films and true crime. I'm also a big supporter of originality, so I didn't want to focus on anything people may have seen committed to film before. There is also an underground familiarity with some of the more obscure serial killers and this is the niche I am aiming at to spread my name around. Once I establish myself as a "name" then hopefully the same fans will support my future film endeavors.

As the film points out, there's many aspects to Holmes that made him an atypical example of a serial killer: The fact that he successfully went all the way through medical school for one, the fact that he kept up several long term relationships with women without killing them for another. But another aspect I thought was notable was the lack of a sexual element to his crimes. Unlike the obvious psycho-sexual gratification of male serial killers who prey solely on woman, he seemed to be an equal opportunity predator, targeting both sexes. What's more - he found a way to actually make a profit on his crimes by selling the skeletons to medical colleges. So his crimes were never crimes of passion. Outside of specific victims he may have chosen to further his finances or cover his trail, was there ever any discernible rhyme or reason to his killing spree? Or would you say that Holmes is an example of someone who was simply "born" evil?

Having done extensive research on Holmes, I feel his crimes were money motivated. He took the ideal of the gilded age and twisted it to succeed at any means necessary.

Holmes enjoyed the sense of power that came with success just as much as he enjoyed power over his victims when he dissected them or locked them in the vault. While writing the film, I tried to figure out why Holmes did what he did. Ultimately I felt that Holmes was pure evil. It's to be debated whether he was born that way or his devious desires developed while growing up.

Holmes is someone to be admired for his genius but loathed for his crimes. I don't want to give away the ending of the film, but I purposely placed a certain quote from Holmes himself at the end of the film because that was the only way I could account for what Holmes was and why he existed.

When doing research for the film, did you ever think "how did this guy become forgotten?". I know that while watching the film myself I was amazed that Holmes' story wasn't more widely known - even among many aficionados of serial killer lore.

Making the film, I have been asked many times why no one else ever made a film on Holmes in the past 100 years. I couldn't figure it out myself since it is such a great story and character study. Jack the Ripper may have overshadowed Holmes since Jack's identity has been a mystery and his crimes were definitely sex crimes. Holmes' case was closed and many people may have wanted to forget the human monster living in our society as a father, husband, and prominent businessman. I feel Holmes burns something deep into the human psyche that many people would rather not admit: That these monsters exist all around us. There have been hundreds of films made on Jack the Ripper and so far, only one on H. H. Holmes. He is also a tough subject to tackle, especially if a feature narrative was made, it may be hard to believe it is a true story and would seem preposterous. Many times certain ideas initially seem like a great subject to commit to film, but can fall apart in the hands of less experienced directors.

"I feel Holmes burns something deep into the human psyche that many people would rather not admit: That these monsters exist all around us." 

Do you think a documentary better serves Holmes' story than a dramatized account would? Are the details of Holmes' case so outrageous that any attempt to dramatize them might seem too unbelievable?

Initially I did want to film a dramatic film about H. H. Holmes, and still do, but I decided that I would combine my feature narrative filmmaking skills with the documentary format to create a docudrama. Creating the film in this way, I could gain more exposure since the film can be seen as a serious biographic look at a serial killer rather than just another "horror film" in the market. I also knew that I could have fun with the format and film the reenactments to purposely look like old silent films by utilizing techniques such as static camera shots and circle wipes. People forget the fact that the late nineteenth century was still a somewhat innocent time period in the respect that people trusted their neighbor. Sure there were many crimes occurring by gangs and assassinations, but people trusted others who fit into their own worlds.

This is why it would be easy for modern audiences to see people who were conned by Holmes as "stupid". It was a different time period and mindset. Now people are more aware of the dangers that exist around us in our daily lives.

In the course of making the film, you visited Holmes' childhood home. Was that an eerie experience?

It was an odd experience to look out of the bed and breakfast room where I was staying and see Holmes' childhood home staring back at me the next house over. Walking in his basement was scary as well. Who knows how many animals he may have buried down there. Gilmanton is interesting in the fact that it has essentially remained unchanged since the nineteenth century. The library is tiny, they have a small corner store and the roads are still dirt country roads. It was like going back in time.

Are there any particularly interesting details about Holmes that didn't make it into the movie? What was the process like of paring down the details of his life to a feature length film?

Figuring out what details to omit and leave in were the hardest decision when I was writing the script. I knew I couldn't even mention some details because then I would have to expand on them. Since there was such a small amount of material available, I did not want to constantly re-show the same photographs, which is something I am still accused of doing.

I like my films to have a constant forward movement. The initial cut of Holmes was ninety minutes, but it dragged. So I made the conscious effort to cut it down to a hour long format for eventual TV and Cable distribution. H. H. Holmes: America's First Serial Killer is just a primer, there are some books out there for people interested in finding out more.

There are also two books being sold on the Holmes website which are Holmes' Own Story and The Holmes Pitezel Case. Artistically I really don't care how long a film is. The length of a film should be determined by how much of the story needs to be exposed and how effective the pacing is. As a professional producer, I have to understand what lengths are required for theatrical distribution and broadcast.

Thankfully there are director's cuts for DVD.

Do you think there's some kind of serendipity in the fact that Devil in the White City was recently released with a big budget movie adaptation planned just as your film is coming out? Or is it just inevitable that Holmes' story would come around into popular culture again?

It was definitely good luck for me that the book was released before my film was. I had no idea that Devil was being released until I was wrapping up post production on my film in the winter of 2002. The book has drawn some exposure to my film, especially in Chicago where it is still on the lips of many people. I feel that Cruise and Paramount should be thankful to me for branding the name of H. H. Holmes.

It's really because of my publicity and marketing efforts though the website, teaser T-shirts, and positive reviews that the world is learning more about who H. H. Holmes really was. I think pop culture is ready for Holmes, especially with the recent explosion of true crime shows on television. It is fascinating to return to another time period where forensics and profiling did not exist, but a serial killer that rivals and exceeds any modern killer did exist. I am amazed he was even caught.

"It's not easy to live with the horrors of these killers inside my head, but I feel their stories should be told."

Watching the film, I felt as though an equally compelling film could've been made about detective Frank Geyer's efforts in bringing Holmes' crimes to light - he's clearly a notable figure. But do you think it's just human nature to gravitate to Holmes' story instead?

Geyer does deserve a film of his own. But it is a fact that the majority of people are drawn towards tragedy, or at least interested in it. We all know the example of "gapers block". There must always be dark and light. Personally, I am more drawn and fascinated to the darker aspects of life. Whether you like Holmes or not, it must be admitted that he is a fascinating character and he was a genius at the life of crime that he made profitable. Stories such as Holmes' can make people feel remorse for the victims but also provide a sense of being alive by opening up dialogues about human nature. It is too easy to dismiss these killers as evil and destroy them rather than study what created them.

Lastly, what's next for you as a filmmaker? Would a further documentary about a serial killer be a possibility or has making H. H. Holmes exhausted your interest in the subject for now?

I'm in development on a feature narrative film based on the life of Albert Fish, a 1920's New York cannibal: www.albertfishfilm.com. It's not easy to live with the horrors of these killers inside my head, but I feel their stories should be told. I may create one more SK film and make it a trilogy, look for the boxed set in the future! 

The direction I really want to move into is creating suspenseful horror films, which can incorporate true crime as well. I really enjoyed Caleb Carr's The Alienist and would like to see that novel brought to the screen with me directing. Keep your eyes open for future works from John Borowski!

   ____________________________________________________________________

And with that, I'd like to thank John for taking the time to share his thoughts with us and wish him well on his upcoming projects. 

To order H. H. Holmes, go to the official site.