Quick Facts & Overview.
Title: Lurker (2025).
Director / Writer: Alex Russell (his feature debut).
Runtime: ~101 minutes.
Language / Country: English / United States.
Genre: Psychological thriller / drama with elements of obsession, power dynamics, music industry milieu.
Box office / gross:
• Domestic gross (U.S.): ~$625,372.
• Worldwide gross (from listing): ~$633,965.
• Opening domestic (first weekend): $56,985.
Premieres / release:
• Premiered at Sundance Film Festival, January 26, 2025.
• U.S. theatrical release: August 22, 2025 (limited).
Cast — Who appears, how many principal actors
Here are the principal cast members (named, with significant roles) for Lurker:
| Actor | Character / Role |
|---|---|
| Théodore Pellerin | Matthew Morning (the retail worker / protagonist) |
| Archie Madekwe | Oliver, rising pop musician |
| Zack Fox | Swett |
| Havana Rose Liu | Shai |
| Wale Onayemi | Bowen |
| Daniel Zolghadri | Noah |
| Sunny Suljic | Jamie |
So we have 7 principal cast members by the usual listing. There are likely additional smaller roles (entourage, managers, background characters), but the narrative centers on those above.
Who is the “means character” / central protagonist?
The main focus is Matthew Morning (Théodore Pellerin). He is the “lurker” — the person whose obsession, infiltration, and proximity drive the narrative. The audience follows him more closely than any other character: his internal motives, his decisions, and how he navigates access to Oliver’s life. Oliver is a key co-lead (the pop star), but much of the moral weight, tension, and ambiguity lie in Matthew’s choices, his lies, and the extent to which he pushes boundaries.
So Matthew is the means character: the narrative lens, the moral enigma, the one whose arc we track.
Box / Gross / Commercial Performance.
- The U.S. domestic gross reported is $625,372.
- According to the general listing, the worldwide gross is ~$633,965 — suggesting that the bulk of its theatrical impact came domestically and in limited runs.
- Its opening domestic weekend was $56,985 (for limited screenings).
- Compared to high-budget or wide releases, these numbers are modest; however, as an indie psychological thriller with limited release, these are typical for niche offerings.
Thus, Lurker is not a blockbuster — its financial “box collection” is modest — but its success is more measured by critical reception, festival buzz, and impact in discussions of obsession, fame, and parasocial dynamics.
Niche / What kind of film is Lurker.
Lurker sits in the niche of psychological thrillers about obsession, fandom, and power dynamics in celebrity culture. Some defining traits of its niche:
- It explores parasocial relationships — how fans try to bridge the distance to those they admire (Oliver) and what lengths they might go.
- It deals with power, identity, and control in the music / entertainment industry orbit.
- It is a social-media age thriller: proximity, image, media, documentation (Matthew filming Oliver) are integral.
- It is character-driven more than action-driven; tension is psychological, not chase-heavy.
- It stands in conversation with similar “obsession / fame” films (e.g. Saltburn, Ingrid Goes West, The Idol) — but tries to bring its own groundedness and moral ambiguity.
So Lurker is for an audience that wants tension, character study, and commentary on celebrity culture — rather than big spectacle or thriller tropes.
Deep Details: Plot, Themes, Strengths, Weaknesses.
Plot summary (without major spoilers)
Matthew Morning works at a vintage clothing store in L.A. He’s socially awkward, lives with his grandmother, and is obsessed with music and fandom. One day Oliver, a rising pop musician, enters his store, and Matthew plays a song on the store’s speakers (a track Oliver likes) to catch his attention. Oliver, intrigued, gives Matthew a backstage pass to his concert.
Matthew slowly insinuates himself into Oliver’s inner circle. He begins filming, contributing visuals, making himself useful. Oliver’s friends and entourage are suspicious, especially as Matthew’s presence becomes more constant.
Tension escalates. Oliver asks Matthew to delete certain footage, because of perception issues. At one point, Oliver’s entourage physically assaults Matthew in a remote location to get to the hard drive containing Matthew’s documentary footage. Matthew’s loyalty, desperation, and capacity to manipulate are tested. Finally, Matthew’s documentary premieres in a festival setting, and he finds himself publicly in the spotlight, invited onstage, and forced to answer: how did he get here?
The ending is ambiguous: Matthew is lauded in public, but morally he is compromised — the film leaves us unsettled about whether his methods were justified or disturbing.
Themes & what Lurker is exploring
Obsession, identity & proximity
Matthew’s journey is about how proximity to a figure you admire can warp identity. He tries to become indispensable, to merge ambition with access — and in doing so, he risks losing boundaries. The film asks: who will remain when closeness becomes leverage?
Power & performativity
Oliver’s world is performative: to be seen, to have image control, to disburse favor, to maintain distance. Matthew must perform loyalty, fandom, competence. The dynamic is not simply fan vs star but mutual performance and contest over who controls the narrative.
Blurred moral lines, manipulation
Matthew is not purely innocent. He lies, manipulates, probes. The film doesn’t let us fall back on “he’s just a victim” — it forces us to confront how much manipulation is embedded in his rise. Power shifts back and forth.
Fame, visibility, and exploitation
In a media age, access is currency. The film is about how fans are exploited, how visibility is a trap, and how people circulation around celebrity can be as toxic as fame itself. Matthew’s filming Oliver is both gift and surveillance.
Isolation, social alienation
Matthew’s life is marked by loneliness, awkwardness, lack of social anchor. His relationship with Oliver becomes a way to belong. But that belonging is precarious. The film shows how alienation can push people into dangerous emotional gambits.
Strengths — what Lurker does well
- Tension & atmosphere
Reviewers praise how the film maintains a tension that is never fully explosive but always charged. The power shifts and the moral ambiguity keep scenes uneasy. - Strong performances
Théodore Pellerin embodies Matthew’s awkwardness, hunger, and creepiness; Archie Madekwe gives Oliver an aloof charisma that keeps us unsure of him. Supporting actors (Havana Rose Liu, Zack Fox, etc.) add texture. - Visual & stylistic choices
The cinematography (shot partially on 16mm, using vintage camcorder, grainy textures) gives Lurker a visual edge that aligns with its themes of visibility / recording. Scenes that mimic music video aesthetics are well integrated rather than jarring. - Ambiguous moral framing
The film resists easy judgment. The audience is often unsure whether Matthew is justifiable or dangerous, making the viewer complicit in weighing lines. That ambiguity is one of its strengths. - Contemporary resonance
In an era of social media, celebrity culture, parasocial relationships, Lurker feels relevant. It taps into anxieties about visibility, influence, and exploitation that many recognize in modern fandom.
Weaknesses & criticisms
- Stretching credulity
Some reviewers argue that the story sometimes demands too much suspension of disbelief — how many missteps Matthew makes yet continues to be accepted by Oliver’s circle. - Character motivation gaps
While Matthew is fully developed, Oliver’s character sometimes feels less fleshed, especially motivations for letting Matthew stay close are under-explored. - Pacing and escalation issues
Some critics say the film’s rise in tension feels delayed; the middle section can drag slightly before payoff scenes arrive. - Thriller bite sometimes diluted
Because the film minimizes violence and chooses psychological tension, some viewers might find the thriller element less gripping or less bold than expected. - Ambiguity leaves loose threads
The ending, while haunting, leaves some questions unanswered — some viewers feel it ends before fully resolving moral arcs or consequences.
Reception & Critical Snapshot.
- On Rotten Tomatoes, Lurker is praised as a “terrifying portrait of obsession in the digital age” with strong acting and unsettling tone.
- The Guardian calls it “deviously entertaining Hollywood hanger-on thriller,” noting that Alex Russell balances genre elements with focus and restraint.
- Collider is more critical, calling it a “wannabe mix of Saltburn and The Idol” that fails to match their shocking energy. Collider
- Insession Film gives it a positive review, noting that it “haunts long after the lights come up” and emphasizes its relevancy in a digital age of manipulations.
- The FilmStage criticizes some of the thriller logic: the cat-and-mouse game is obvious in places, and the film sometimes fails to maintain consistent mystery.
Overall critics tend to praise its ambition, performances, and thematic weight, while noting that it sometimes stumbles in pacing or in the plausibility of relationships.
Final Verdict & Who Should Watch Lurker.
Lurker is not a blockbuster thriller — but it is a provocative, often chilling meditation on obsession, identity, and proximity in a celebrity-obsessed world. If you like psychological dramas that dwell in ambiguity, that force you to ask whether admiration becomes intrusion, this is a film to see.
Watch it if you:
- enjoy tension that is more creeping than explosive
- like films that blur the lines between fan and predator
- want strong performances, moral ambiguity, and commentary on fame and social media
- don’t demand every thread tied up or every character fully explained
Maybe not for you if you:
- need a thriller with lots of action, big violent set pieces, or clear moral resolution
- dislike stories in which characters make bad decisions and get away with them
- prefer traditional narrative coherence over ambiguity
In short: Lurker isn’t perfect, but it is memorable. It speaks to the times — the modern age of Instagram, proximity, fandom, and how easily boundaries blur when power is involved. Matthew’s rise is unsettling not because it’s supernatural, but because it feels like a plausible tragedy of ambition combined with emotional loneliness.
If you like, I can also send you a scene-by-scene spoiler breakdown of the film’s key turning points and how the moral arcs unravel — want me to do that?
