Albert Fish: In Sin He Found Salvation

I've been watching some "True Crime" stuff and this fluffed-up film got recommended by Amazon. Not even watchable. Normally I make a point to endure movies all the way to their ends before reviewing them here, but this time I have to admit I turned it off halfway through. It's as though they had about ten minutes' worth of facts and fluffed them out to become a feature length film. Just read the Wikipedia article if you're curious about this repugnant human being.

This was a good little documentary that could have been much better but still, I enjoyed it quite a bit. I've always been fascinated with Albert Fish and other serial killers so it was very interesting to see documentary on the man. I was actually pretty disturbed through most of the film. I always say that I can watch any movie that I know is fake and it won't bother me, but when it's real, it really gets to me and this one did just that.

I loved the scenes where it just told the story of Albert Fish with a narrator. However, there were quite a few interviews with a bunch nobodies that no one cares about and those really annoyed me. I just want to hear the story, not a bunch of idiots babbling about how they know soooo much about Albert Fish. Other than that, it was very creepy the whole way through and completely chilling. Check it out.

Ever since I was a child, I've been hooked on true crime TV shows and documentaries, so I've seen countless versions. But, my goodness, I know the victims are long dead, but the level of disrespect in this is off the charts. This is the most shameless, exploitative, low-brow tripe masquerading as a true crime documentary I've ever seen. It's almost like the creepy, pretentious superfan they kept talking to had directed the documentary. The different narrators are laughable, from the "old-timey newscaster" voice to the "ghostly" woman voice to the voice meant to be Albert Fish's, they all increase the awfulness tenfold. The documentary trivializes the deaths by focusing on terrible, "artsy" "reenactments" and inserts (that all look like total crap, BTW).

This documentary was made by a failed film school student who loved Albert Fish. I'm actually curious to know about Albert Fish, but I'd do better watching a random on YT talk about it. In fact, there are YT channels who do a better job than this by far.

The story is so horrifying and gruesome, even by today's standards, that the director's attempts at dramatization add nothing and are more of a distraction. Multiple shots of roasting meat in the shape of ass? Really? And too much time is spent with two dubious "experts," one of whom proudly describes how he acquired Fish's confession letter in an act of larceny (anyone send a copy of this film to the cops in Westchester County?) and who creepily asserts that Fish MUST have loved Grace Buddd in order to do what he did to her. Huh? Anyone want to go dig around in THIS guy's backyard? And all of the religious motivation nonsense is completely at odds with what we know about sexual homicide. It's all about a toxic mix of extreme self absorption and the desire to control others with a nice positive feedback of orgasm. That's it folks. No religious motive here. The religious stuff may have helped him rationalize what he did and certainly sweetened the filth aspect for this guy, but that's probably it. Read Schecter's Deranged instead for a good Fish account.

I had the unfortunate chance to watch it in a theater. This is a TV documentary and not to be seen on theater!!

Many things bothered me, but the fact that the narrator was repeating the same informations 3 times through out the "docu" completely annoyed me.

It was very annoying how much effort the creators put into making it a shockumentary. But it was o-so- lame. Over dramatic narrator pointing out words like "pain" and "virgin" and "fish" and the dramatization focused on very handsome naked teens instead of the brutality and the character and the causes of Albert Fish. It only gave us a spoonful about Fish and repeated the same informations again and again and again and then "naked teens" and "virgin" and only had 2 interviewers!!

The worst one was this psycho horror artifacts creator who was mainly talking about himself and his origins and a few words about Fish as if he had something important to add to Fish's story. And the other one was a woman obsessed with Fish and his sexual life. At a point they had access to Fish's psychiatrist records and they didn't use real Fish's voice at all, and his sayings for not more than 5 minutes! Why??

In a few words don't waste your time with it, it's just super lame.