Not all movies require a sense of purpose, but I think Creep could've benefited from one. Though disturbing its intrigue never pays off.

Let me start off by saying I am not at all a fan of the Found Footage sub-genre, or any other cinematographic project which is shot in first person view. The only reason I've decided to give Creep a try was that I ran out of Netflix English-speaking Horror and I like foreign films even less (nothing racist, heavens forbid, I simply find them more difficult to follow due to the sheer dependency on subtitles). That being said, I'm quite glad I did try out Creep, as it has some very memorable moments and features.First of all, the cast, by which I of course mean Mark Duplass as the creepy and unnerving Joseph. Some actors simply have certain physical and exterior features that when used right make them perfect for certain typecasts. Duplass is absolutely unforgettable as the neurotic and disturbed creep-type, always keeping you on the borderline between pity and sheer terror.The story itself is nice, though too full of holes for my liking (the ending in particular, which was completely unconvincing and forced, you'll know what I mean when you reach it). However, unlike most Found Footage films, Creep uses very little "camera effects" and does so delicately enough to not steal focus from the actual film. Add to that Duplass's amazing acting and on-the-spot role and you get a film that is scary enough to be enjoyed even by those who, like myself, prefer to avoid this sub-genre.All in all, I'd say this film is a must-watch for fans of the sub-genre and possibly rewarding enough for other Horror fans. My relatively high rating is absolutely due to Duplass, I can't stress enough how perfect he was for this part and how amazingly fitting his acting was.

There isn't a person I know that wouldn't have had a conseal and carry license and a firearm or a friend with one looking out for him or her in that same situation. This movie might have been interesting if it was released in the mid-'90's with an awesome internet real events marketing campaign, but it's not. 10 hamfisted jumpscares and a cheap Halloween mask + found footage do not make Halloween + The Blair Witch. This movie wasted my time and made me so mad I had to log in, type this, give it 1 Star, and pray whoever reads this doesn't waste the 1.5-2hs that I wasted

An NPR podcast ran a story a while back, in which the NPR-ish narrator recalls with some embarrassment how he didn't realize that a kooky guy he had been friends with for years was in fact a homeless pathological liar. At first, the listener naturally assumes the story would be about the mechanics of this prodigious feat of deceit. But then it slowly becomes evident that the real story is how much of a gormless doofus the narrator happens to be, and how he had essentially enabled this charade the entire time by ignoring all sorts of obvious warning signs.The dynamic is kinda the same here. It's also my main gripe with this film, but later on that. In the tradition of modern American workplace criticism etiquette, the turd sandwich must always start with a compliment:Mark Duplass - aka the actor who plays the titular creep - totally carries the entire film. As far as character acting is concerned, he nails this role. It's hard to be menacing and endearing at the same time, and Duplass pulls it off with a weird grace that keeps the viewer off-balance for most of the film, even when he is not present on screen. Even though you know the general direction the film is veering in, this kooky fella's weird ramblings and edgy antics will keep you guessing throughout!The other character - played by Partick Brice - is a pasty, out-of-shape, out-of-work camera-beardo. He is not particularly dumb - in fact, he seems to be guardedly on edge from the get-go - but he is bland, unimaginative, and for lack of a better term, just plain ineffective. He is unemployed and alone; he wears a "fitness to productivity office workouts" t-shirt to bed. (Brice totally nails this role.)Now, when you pair a malleable doofus like that with a vibrant weirdo, all sorts of interesting possibilities open up. Perhaps they would have been explored if these guys had more money. If this cost more than several grand to make, I don't see how or why: the only other person in the film besides the two leads is a voice on the other end of a 30 second phone call, no effects and minimal props, and the whole film could have probably been filmed and edited on an iPad. With this in mind, the film is actually a dazzling example of squeezing the most out of a shoestring budget. But what at first feels like a realized vision veers into the territory of a squandered opportunity as it nears its disappointingly anticlimactic conclusion, racking up an ever-growing list of plausibility gripes along the way. The cameraman has bizarre recurring dreams, but they're pointless - they don't inform his actions, they don't indicate character development...they hardly even qualify as generic foreshadowing! And even though there's nothing inherently implausible about wanting to keep the law out of certain situations, the writing in that regard has to be one of the lazier efforts in horror at addressing the absence of cops. So it's pretty dumb, and even though it's technically a horror film, most of the "jump scares" in the film are literally the creepy guy running away from the camera guy and then jumping out at him from the corner like a 9 year old. Boo indeed. But the two leads make this more entertaining than it ought to be, and though it's not particularly scary, it has a wry, improvised sense of humor that had the potential to really knock this one out of the park - if only their ideas about character trajectory were better developed.