the concept misses the mark for me. there's no link between your subject and the background. imo the shot is either the creepy church or the girl, together they're just two separate elements that get in the way of each other. I almost want to say that in this case, it's the girl that's in the way. With that pose, gaze/expression, and under lighting the only thing that really interests me is the church, and she's blocking half of it! the fence is certainly not helping either. it's a glaring physical and metaphorical barrier between the two subjects. i think crazy portrait locations work when you're going for all out glamour type shots. beautifully lit/dressed/prepared model in some crazy location. these shots are all about the crazy "look at me" aesthetic, no reason or realism with the location and lighting, just some absurdly interesting mix of elements that gets the viewer's attention. otherwise it just looks more like a touristy, "look i was there" type documentation (which does have it's purpose, just doesn't necessarily make for a cohesive image). the subject is way underlit in #1 and the colors are too painterly, and 2-4 don't really show me anything with the church silhouette, and the desaturation only brings out the brightness of the gate.
my opinion, if you reshoot: go past the gate, and be sure to include the crooked roof cross and detail/color of the weathered walls. that's what pushes the creepiness factor. and really light up your subject both literally and figuratively, make sure she is just as interesting (if not more) than the background.