Monsters (2010) Reviews

• Less like a geographical reboot of D-9 and more like an art-house Cloverfield or a blockbuster Stalker

  foamhands7132010-08-08

  While there have been plenty of valid comparisons made between this film and last year's sci-fi hit District - 9 (due solely to the fact that the two films share an admittedly similar global concept; that of aliens landing and being contained within a restricted zone as a forced but entertaining allegory for racial disharmony. There the zone was in central South Africa and here it is the northernmost section of Mexico, the borderlands.) I think the media have missed the much more obvious filmic connections. To my mind this film is in fact less like a geographical reboot of D-9 and more like an art-house Cloverfield or perhaps a blockbuster Stalker (Andrei Tarkovsky's epically sparse sci-fi classic). While the concept and metaphor certainly match that of District – 9 the closest the execution sways it further towards a combination of the latter two examples. Instead of attempting to tell the story of a fictional universe using a number of cipher characters like D-9, this film instead tells the story of its two leads by way of its alien infestation. The titular monsters certainly are an integral force in crafting and driving the films narrative but they are not its real focus, this is where the two films differ. Instead we are made to follow American investigate journalist Colbert who is tasked by his employer to find and then accompany his daughter through the infected zone and into the United States before the beginning of the creature's active season. It's a sparse plot and one that leads to a lot less action than you would expect, but it does work as the spinal centre of the film. Instead of confronting the creatures at every turn, discovering their origin, their weakness, their queen and then eventually using their knowledge to develop a dues ex machina and save the day like the big damn heroes of every similar film, these two simply exist in the universe like we do ours; as everyday citizens living their everyday lives. That's not to say though that the film is in any way banal; in fact their journey through the zone allows for a lot of stunning shots, shocking stories and silent terror, it's just that these occur in a different tense then we are used to. We are, like the protagonist Colbert, journalists in this world; we follow in the wake of the story, catching occasional glimpses of it from afar but mainly focusing on who and what it leaves behind. The monsters, their destruction and the alternate world that they destroy are all filtered through the protagonists before they reach us upon the screen. It is their reactions to the events that elicit responses in us and their responses that in turn become our emotions. It is essential that the two leads be well crafted in order for this method to work. Thankfully then, they are; Hitting that perfect ratio of realism, stereotype, flaw and likability. They are the kind of characters that you would happily follow within the comparatively banal confines of a drama and so here, in this realm of heightened stakes, they become doubly interesting. The real surprise of the film for me was just how enjoyable, and oftentimes moving, it was to take this trip with the leads; to the point that by the time the ending rolled around I almost echoed their calls of 'I don't want to go home'. That dreaded disillusionment, the return to drudgery after a distinctly powerful event is something I can really understand but it is something uncommon to see in cinemas. Edwards isn't the only person to be thanked for this though; while his writing is great it's the two lead performances that are really essential and I think these two will be ones too watch in the future. While I've made it quite clear that personally I preferred the human side of the story - that I could take or leave the monsters in comparison – i know there are many others around here who will not feel the same, others that are in it for the monsters (Spaulds certainly comes to mind). While I wouldn't advise taking that particular approach with this particular film, I don't think any of you creature features that do will be disappointed with what you see – and yes, you do see. The creatures are as well designed and animated as the characters. They feel totally alien to this world yet retain a certain sense of plausibility, as if they could feasibly belong to some other. Their power is also very well handled, being threatening enough in every situation but invincible in none. There is then a consistency to them that doesn't exist in a lot of other creatures, which sometimes feel like they are acting in accordance with the plot rather than their own rules or reality. While this may get some of you salivating I have to say again that well designed or no these creatures are little more than an external force, they exist off screen much more than on. It is then, an ironically titled film I guess because the Monsters of the title are anything but central. I think the real test should be whether or not you would go and see this film were it called 'Humans'. Those that do, more specifically those that make their way all the way through to the final act, will be in for a treat as the film has a handful of utterly sublime moments. The ending itself was a little abrupt but I think it's pretty clever, probably warranting a second watch. Definitely warranting a first watch.

  More

• Less action than expected, but 9/10 imagery, acting, and direction.

  jephbennett2010-10-01

  The first 3 reviews said it all. Amazing movie for a $15k budget. Amazing shots and scenery, good plot line, great acting from leads. Decent monsters and action, when it occurs. I'm starting to think it's the soundtrack that makes a movie seem "big". This movie's eerie sounds, and tension building strings draw you in, like a blockbuster. Can't believe this guy wrote, directed, edited and did the efx. A++++ And ignore the whiny babies crying about this and that. They'd rather watch blood pour out of a corpse than a decent piece of acting. As long as you don't expect another Cloverfield, you should be surprised by a unique cinematic experience. ;)

  More

• Satisfying movie, if you get what sci fi really is

  BillK2010-10-31

  I first heard about this movie in a radio interview, so I was aware that it was very low budget. But lately "sci fi" movies have been all about escalating action to the point of absurdity. Classic sci fi is about people reacting to new/mysterious/dangerous situations. This movie has that, with interesting protagonists. It has echos of Sin Nobre and El Norte, and yes, the context of "alien substitution" echoes District 9. But it's not a re-make, and it's consistently entertaining, with a straight-ahead narrative. There are only a few moments where a shock reaction is telegraphed. A big studio would have made this story into an effects extravaganza. But in my opinion it's more effective showing limited interaction with the aliens. If you can handle real sci fi -- movies without the excesses of Transformers or 2012 -- this sci fi will satisfy.

  More

• NASA accidentally solves border security with lightbright octopi from space.

  g8jedi2010-06-27

  OK this gets a strong 7.9 on my trait average scale that I just made up, but on an insanely low budget of something around $15,000 dollars, this film deserves everyone's attention. The plot: NASA accidentally solves border security with lightbright octopi from space. In the first 3 minutes of this film we learn that a probe carrying samples of alien life has broken up in reentry showering larges swaths of Mexico with debris that eventually manifests in giant octopus monsters. The militaries of the US and Mexico do their best to contain the "infected zone" and kill the monsters with heavy firepower. The story starts about 6 years after the monsters show up and the battle to keep the aliens at bay rages on. We're introduced to a photographer hoping to snap a picture of one of the monsters up close who gets roped into escorting the boss's daughter to the coast and back to her Fiancé' after she's injured in a monster attack. The pair, played by real-life couple Scoot McNairy and Whitney Able, are stuck south of the infected area on an increasingly lawless overland trip through central America trying to find a way back to the safety of the States. The post-apocalyptic feel of the areas destroyed by the monsters make for some of the most memorable shots in this film. The Director/Writer/DP/VFX Artist, Gareth Edwards has shot a really beautiful film that revels in guerrilla style shooting and constantly shifting focuses helping push the subtle urgency of the travelers' situation. The monster effects are believable and Edwards deserves due credit for some fun visuals but he successfully directs our attention to the human story rather than letting the monsters be the main character. This is not a traditional action sci-fi movie though there are certainly heart-pounding, jaw-dropping scenes of mayhem and military firepower; it's a character driven story set in a sci-fi disaster monster movie and it works. Don't go in thinking it is District 9 or Cloverfield. It was certainly not what I expected, but that turned out to be a good thing in this case. Facts from the Director Q&A: -Filmed on a Sony EX3 with a Nikon 50 MM Lens -Used almost exclusively natural light except for a couple tiny LED lights for when it was pitch black -Effects were done in Adobe CS4, editing in Premiere -The majority of filming was shot with just a sound guy the director and the 2 main characters -Look for this to come out in Late October via Magnolia Pictures in the US and November in the UK

  More

• Beautiful Monstrosities

  MatthewInSydney2010-12-02

  Just saw this last night, and have to say, loved it. I can understand teen boys being offended by the lack of action. And I think a lot of people seeing this film might start with preconceptions about what a 'monster' movie should be, which won't do this film any favours. It's a road movie, a slow building drama, a mystery. I actually liked that the two leads were attractive and likable company, without acting in predictable Hollywood ways (you know, where they are unsure about each other, then have a huge fight and yell that they hate each other, then immediately jump into great sex – I am pretty sure in real life only couples who've been together for a while have good angry sex, surely?, I could be wrong, anyway…). But it was the mystery of the intriguing monsters that got me, and the absolutely perfect resolution. Unlike the current 3D CGI megafilms, where everything is boringly and loudly in your face, this film required the audience to join in and use some of it's own imagination, a bit like Alien you could say (without the blood & guts). And, that last scene was so great – easily one of the most perfectly orchestrated scenes I've seen in any film in the last year or two, and to a large degree because it had the sense to not knock the message over your head. And despite it's lack of gigantic special effects, I really think this is a film to see in a cinema, not on TV – to get in the mood, to wonder what's over the next hill, to peer into the darkness to see, wait, is that a tentacle? Like the main characters, the audience needs to be paying attention. Okay, so not a perfect masterpiece from beginning to end, but right now I can't think of many monster movie monsters I've loved in the last decade as much as these octo-spidey-monster thingies. Beautiful! (and I'm pretty p*ssed that a piece of shoddy Hollywood crap like Skyline is showing in 160+ cinemas here in Australia, while this little beauty is only on at a few)

  More