Leaving D.C.

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.

Solid found-footage horror. A man who desires to leave the hustle and bustle of city life for a peaceful life in an isolated house in the woods finds that life is not as peaceful as he'd hoped.

Pretty well-executed for what it is, but also hits the typical tropes of the genre. As things escalate, the principal character refuses to accept the apparent danger he's in, leaving this viewer rolling his eyes. It's necessary for the character to stick around in order for the film to continue, but his unrealistic naivete and stubbornness takes you out of the film a bit.

The creepy parts are tantalising enough to keep you interested, and at a runtime of only 75 minutes it's not a huge investment of time and the scenario does not get overplayed. Keeps things mysterious enough to form your own theories. Worth a watch if you enjoy this sub-genre of horror.

I love found footage films. They're just the best types of movies - and ironically they cost next to nothing to make, so we should have thousands of them. 'Leaving D. C.' is a great example of how effective these films can be. There's nothing more than a creepy concept and the thought in the back of our minds about what could be out there, and yet it is infinitely more scary than most of the big-budget horror being made today.

What you don't see is always more scary than what you do. This film understands that and it is a large reason why it works so well. Sure we see a little bit, but only ever enough to know that something is messed up, never enough to know exactly what it is.

Even at only 77 minutes it can get a little repetitive in parts. Also the ending is going to be a little bit of let down for some. It works, but it is very abrupt and kind of over before you know it. A little more of a drawn out final sequences would have been nice.

Otherwise though I had a great time with this movie. I was on the edge of my seat the whole time and that is something I can't say about enough horror movies these days. 8/10.

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.

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?