The Blackwell Ghost

A filmmaker tries to prove that ghosts are real but soon regrets his intentions after he finds himself being terrorized in a haunted house by a ghost with a dark past. An authentic documentary that shows actual ghost footage that was captured on camera.
Ruth Blackwell
English [CC]
Audio languages
Rentals include 30 days to start watching this video and 48 hours to finish once started.

Watch for $0.00 with Prime

Add to Watchlist
Add to
By ordering or viewing, you agree to our Terms. Sold by Services LLC.
Write review

More details

Independent Documentary
Content advisory
Foul languagefrightening scenesviolence
Purchase rights
Stream instantly Details
Prime Video (streaming online video)
Available to watch on supported devices


3.9 out of 5 stars

2414 global ratings

  1. 58% of reviews have 5 stars
  2. 13% of reviews have 4 stars
  3. 8% of reviews have 3 stars
  4. 5% of reviews have 2 stars
  5. 16% of reviews have 1 stars
Sorted by:

Top reviews from the United States

SLYReviewed in the United States on August 6, 2018
1.0 out of 5 stars
Don’t waste your time!
Verified purchase
Possibly the most boring movie ever. I get that it’s a mock-umentary (fake documentary), but being that it’s fake you’d think they would have a bit more thrills and chills in the movie. Nope. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING HAPPENS in this movie. Zip! Zilch! Zero! Nada! Just one guy droning on about his camera equipment/documentary idea for about 75% of the movie. I kept hoping his wife would kill him, but she just gets really annoyed with him. The big scene is that a door opens and the faucets are all turned on. And that’s at the very end of the movie. Yeah, you sit through the entire flick for the big scary faucets to get turned on and the pantry door to open. I’ve had freakier shit happen in my own house (something ate all the pizza rolls! Why is this toilet overflowing?? Did the cat throw up on the bed or was it Satan himself????) Maybe I should make a movie. Can’t be any worse than this one.
97 people found this helpful
J. GeorgeReviewed in the United States on September 6, 2017
4.0 out of 5 stars
Entertaining, but Fiction Nevertheless
Verified purchase
SPOILERS AHEAD - This purports to be a firsthand documentary by a person who makes professional zombie horror movies. First crack in the illusion: he never gives us his last name nor the title of even one of the movies he supposedly made. If you've ever made and sold a movie, you will *never* pass up a chance to give yourself a free plug. He must have done well with these films as neither John NoLastNamenor his wife seem to have day jobs. Instead, they live in a beautifully appointed home with rich portraiture, and make casual trips in their private airplane at the drop of the hat.

They travel to a Pennsylvania town they somehow never get around to naming (reality crack #2) and meet with the unnamed owner (RC #3) of a supposedly haunted house. The home is quite lovely, and the unnamed owner gives the back story that in the 1940s a woman killed neighborhood children and stuffed their remains into a well in the basement. John NoLastName is suitably creeped out, but his bland, wooden wife has no measurable reaction (RC #4). In fact, despite numerous inexplicable things happening in the film, she couldn't display genuine emotion if her life depended on it. (Maybe she is a zombie from his earlier work?)

The owner of the house (who also has no last name) has no problem inviting these complete strangers that he has met only once to stay in it while he is away for an extended period (RC #5). Having no jobs to impede them, the couple flies back and gets the keys which were left on a window ledge maybe 10 feet away from the door (RC #6). Once inside, John--who described himself as brand new to the idea of paranormal investigation--nonetheless has a huge supply of tripod mounted night vision cameras, tripod mounted night vision lamps, 16 mm film camera, spare batteries, and so on (RC #7). Miss excitement doesn't blink an eye at this anymore than John feels compelled to explain this gaping plot point. It goes on and on, including calling the fire department (which we conveniently never see), calling the police (which we conveniently never see), and even dropping profanity while talking to these mythical police (something that would elicit anything but a casual response in rural PA!). I think we're up to RC 10 at this point. He then does research by calling the archivist of an unnamed library (RC11) who cheerfully agrees to email him over 4,000 microfilmed newspapers (ok, that's possible...if she sent him a link to online archives).

John eventually finds the story he is looking for. He gives us a date, but once again fails to give us the name of the paper. He tells us the murderer is named Ruth Blackwell, but you will not find any hits on Google that lead to a newspaper article reporting these fantasy crimes. A few Pennsylvania web sites promoting ghost-hunting tourism in PA are apparently in on the gimmick, as what few hits you do land all go to cutesy articles about other PA hauntings, but never ever to an actual account of tangible persons, places, and things about any Blackwell murder in that state. Ever.

And on and on and on.

It is like a new Blair Witch Project made for people already trained by decades of paranormal shows to receive it. The audience is the clever one, the film has you believe, because you notice the orbs and he does not. Or you understand why the batteries always die and he is mystified (honestly? You're doing a documentary about the subject, you somehow managed to acquire most of the same equipment, and yet you never though to review your footage as soon as you wake up, or to notice things like flickering in images? You can miss this much and yet still are somehow an accomplished, rich horror film maker? Surrrrrrre.) So the joke is really on us as this this person who understands everything about this fiction of his artfully manages to come off as this goofy, guileless, average man. I don't know if this John wrote this piece (RC number infinity: no credits to writer, no director, no producer, nothing), but regardless, his acting in the role is really very good.

A whole lot of fun, but do not confuse it with reality!
221 people found this helpful
Roger DornbiererReviewed in the United States on November 3, 2019
1.0 out of 5 stars
Can I get a “Zero Star” option, please?
Verified purchase
Terrible waste of time spent making and watching this garbage. (I’m considering suing the makers to get the hour added back to my lifespan.)

The greatest unnerving aspect of this movie was the YouTube video of the hotel “ghost.” In fact, spending an hour watching internet ghost footage will be vastly better than The Blackwell Ghost.

So many other reviews have detailed the flaws, but let me just say that if you are going to make a “documentary” than it might be useful to incorporate some “reality” so it appears as plausible. If one character tells another to call the fire department because the house is filled with smoke, maybe they should and the FD would show up. If you scream for a character to call the police because things are happening in a house (water faucets running/electric stove turned on - terrifying I’m sure you’ll Agree) and they don’t call the police, then the writer needs to be drummed out of the film industry and sent back to writing high school student films - which are probably superior to this effort - if there was any effort.

If the house was potentially on fire, would your spouse re aim on the second floor waiting to see what was the matter, or hovering by the nearest ground floor exit?

Another give away that this was BS was every time you watched footage of the person walking into a “scary” environment, mood music appears in the background. Wow, multimedia from beyond.

At the end of this visual fecal matter, as an afterthought, the audience is shown the hint of a white blob of light caught on video in the basement as the camera guy is running away while managing to hold the camera up to capture footage. But the camera guy doesn’t seem to think to use the same camera viewer that guided him through the darkness to find an escape path when frightened. Instead he cries, I can’t see see anything, I can’t find my way out. Then manages to get out without tripping or bumping into anything, as if he used the viewer.

Folks, grab your iPhone, write a few concepts on index cards and make your own fake-umentary. It will exceed this pap in every way possible.
34 people found this helpful
EpicReviewed in the United States on March 13, 2018
3.0 out of 5 stars
Fraudulence can be fun.
Verified purchase
Clearly fake. The most immediate confirming detail, for me, was that there would have been a lot of press over the serial killing of seven children. None of it was presented because, well, there wasn't any.. And the "1941" photo of the house, though aged-up through manipulation, shows the exact same landscaping as the "contemporary" image. The trees and shrubbery are the same size and have the same branches. That can't be. And, as a researcher, since when have local libraries digitized all their microfilms and offer to e-mail huge files to people who simply ring them up?

The film was well constructed, well considered, and enjoyed. There is enough bait and complexity to offer the appearance of reality. I wasn't keen on an "independent" film maker who is so easily scared and kept asking/telling his "wife" what to do. Nor did I understand, an easy-going 911 system where you can just kinda roll back emergency calls. The script rang hollow for the wife, who apparently lacked curiosity as well as fear and should have had a bigger, more natural role as both a ghost hunter and spouse. Though all of the haunting effects can be well explained, they were well handled. not over-the-top, but well paced and distributed. The story, though superficially unbelievable (and the filmmakers turned this into a virtue rather than a problem!), reasonably progressed, built in tension and lacked any big splashy ending that almost always undermines credibility. This was fun, especially if the viewer simply enjoys the ride rather giving anything much thought.
55 people found this helpful
CeceReviewed in the United States on February 19, 2021
1.0 out of 5 stars
Verified purchase
Honestly, the one star is not for the movie itself. The movie itself I would give about four stars. As far as mockumentary horror goes, this one's pretty damn good. I don't like flashy horror. Flashy horror isn't scary to me and often just makes me laugh cause it's so bad. This movie is not that if that's what you are looking for. The acting is good, and the reactions are as realistic as they can be for something that is fiction. BUT that is my problem with this movie. It is complete fiction and yet it has a documentary label on it. That's got to be false advertising, yes? And it's extremely misleading. To the gullible, they're going to take this as truth and then fight tooth and nail to keep believing so. There's enough misinformation in the world, do we need to start labeling horror fiction as reality? No. My point is, the category choice feels extremely scummy. This should be labeled correctly, and until it is, my review will remain one star.
16 people found this helpful
Kelly Reviewed in the United States on October 2, 2017
1.0 out of 5 stars
No.... just no.
Verified purchase
If you are thinking this is a documentary that focuses on bringing you truth if the paranormal, oh boy are you I for a surprise.

The main character, I say this because you never get his name, first red flag. He supposedly finds evidence from archives, never shows the actual articles so we could find them for our selves and is very vague on where this archive is or what it is called, and when trying to provide validity, you tend to be be thorough and specifically cite evidence and where you get said evidence so others can find it for them selves which would offer validity to your claims, this guy does not, second red flag.

Convenient editing, or "battery failure" third red flag.

The chandelier moving around almost exactly like in paranormal activity, really? Fourth red flag.

The light turning off and on, if you look hard enough, you can see it's plugged into a timer or something of that sort, that is gone later in the film, fifth red flag.

The credited actress on the Amazon page is the ghost, whom you never actually see, I unless you count the shadow apparition, which to be honest if real could be anything from a "victim " to a demon and not necessarily the ghost of ruth herself and, the person behind the camera or his wife, not veing in the credits, sixth red flag.

The wife's attitude towards the whole thing is far from genuine from some one undergoing a paranormal event, seventh red flag.

I was not entertained. It was like a bad ripoff of paranormal activity. I do not recommend, and I see why this director kept his name off the fllm.
30 people found this helpful
Dowdy FinklesteinReviewed in the United States on October 21, 2020
1.0 out of 5 stars
This Series Never Should Have Been Authorized for Sale
Verified purchase
I am no skeptic. I am an open-minded social scientist who happens to believe there is sufficient data to suggest that ghosts are real. And it is for this reason that I think the Blackwell Ghost series is so detestable. Turner Clay, if that is his REAL name, projects a false disbelief in the now-famous Illinois hotel ghost video, pretending to track down, corner, and interrogate its creators when in actuality, HE was the one to post that video. Now I have to question the authenticity of both the hotel ghost video as well as the whole Blackwell Ghost series.

As many others have pointed out, when you look for corroborating source material, it cannot be found. He anticipates this criticism by pointing out there are 100,000 unsolved murders about which no information can be found on the Web. But news outlets would have most definitely posted headlines that Florida police -- with or without assistance from our heroic ghost hunter and sleuth Turner Clay -- uncovered the remains of 4 missing women presumed murdered by serial killer James Lightfoot. No such news can be found. You would also expect the Internet to have James Lightfoot or Ruth Blackwell listed among serial killers. Lightfoot took 18 lives around 1972 and Blackwell killed 7 children a century earlier. According to data repositories, neither Blackwell nor Lightfoot ever existed.

I will reach out to Amazon to request a refund. I watched these documentaries assuming they were documentaries. This is false advertising. Amazon should attempt to recoup any money earned by the film's producers. And it should pull these videos or place that familiar disclaimer at the end identifying the characters as fictitious.
10 people found this helpful
David B. CummingsReviewed in the United States on August 23, 2017
4.0 out of 5 stars
Not boring
Verified purchase
I normally don't watch paranormal type stuff because they're always so dull but it was two in the morning and this was in my suggested movie list so I gave it a shot.
I thought it was great. The guy is pretty entertaining just to watch and listen to and the story moved at a pretty good pace so it kept my attention.
The basement wasn't all that creepy to me but the open well was a nice touch and the thing with the ball would have made me crap my pants! lol
I say give this one a watch!
35 people found this helpful
See all reviews