Leaving D.C.

The actor gives a good, solid performance of someone who, you (a little too quickly) realize was not wound all that tight to begin with, then thrusts himself into an unfamiliar territory thinking it will be good for him. His possible issues come more and more to the forefront in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. Unfortunately the lack of a budget means the ending will make you think the time spent wasn't worth it ( the end of the original Paranormal Activity was a showstopping extravaganza by contrast) but then you think, maybe it was--just to see one guy pull something like this off all by himself.

It was not an easy task to acquire this movie, let alone learning about it (IIRC I found it on someone's "best found footage horror" list here on IMDb).

This is probably the best found footage horror movie I watched made by one guy with little to no budget. It's extremely realistic and things happening during the movie are really scary and authentic. The movie consumes you fully, I needed to eat at some point and didn't even wanted to do that because I was too absorbed by it.

No typical tropes and no clichés, I watched hundreds of horror movies and never seen a story like this. No, the premise itself is nothing really original, but the details and the way they're presented makes the story unique.

The movie doesn't have a single freakin' jumpscare or all that stupid "noisy glitches" on the footage. Not even a "super dark" soundtrack. It just doesn't need that. Just pure, smart horror.

I don't like "found footage" movies. This is one of the rare exceptions that isn't formulaic and uninspired like so many. There is no action, no impressive special effects, no jump scares, or any of the usual trappings these offerings tend to produce. There is just a man, a camera and a good, creepy story. The first 10 minutes or so does not feel like a horror movie at all, I actually had to check the title to make sure I was watching what I thought I was watching. It also bucked tradition by avoiding the big typical "hollywood-esque" ending. I found this all to be really refreshing. Granted he probably didn't have the budget for these things, but showed they aren't essential components for a good movie.

I'm frequently antagonized by found footage films that tend to follow no logic and interrupt any significant action with electronic video interference. Leaving D.C. doesn't fall into any of those traps and presents a straightforward but interesting narrative about an average guy who moves out to the woods, where he's beset by what just may be supernatural phenomena. The film's mystery builds slowly and much of the interest involves simply observing star/director/writer Josh Criss doing his logical best to rise to the occasion of confronting a wave of spookiness. It's entirely watchable and Criss does a creditable job carrying the film as its primary on-camera presence, explaining the reasonable steps he's taking to identify and deflect the bizarre intrusions. While the conclusion could have used a little more oomph, the film is a good ride and an excellent example of what can be achieved with limited resources.

I was very impressed by this "one man band" version of found footage horror films.

Josh Criss does a great job of keeping you engaged and slowly building suspense. It all feels real, which is key to a successful found footage film.

This is essentially a story about a troubled man, who moves out to the middle of nowhere to escape the hustle and bustle of city living, but becomes obsessed with the odd happenings occuring late at night in the woods surrounding his new home.

It's an intriguing film, mostly for its simplicity, but also for its understanding that less is often more when it comes to building suspense, and budget is not much of a factor or excuse anymore, when rating a film's quality. If Josh Criss can do it with a camcorder and no dough, why can't hollywood?