Monsters Reviews

Since I kept hearing some good things about this flick, I was quite intrigued and rather eager to check it out. Indeed, even the great Roger Ebert loved this movie but, honestly, I’m not sure I really shared his enthusiasm. I don’t know, maybe I have seen too many similar flicks like ‘District 9’ or ‘Cloverfield’ and even though I enjoyed most of it, I can’t say I was really impressed. First of all, I do have a weak spot for those movies which have a realistic approach towards Science-Fiction, it is a very nice trend, and Gareth Edwards has indeed created a very nice mood but I didn’t care much for the rest, I’m afraid. I also liked the fact that we don’t learn much about the two characters, once again, a nice approach, but what we did learn about their private life was really tedious and the way they slowly get attracted to one another seriously didn’t add anything to the story. Furthermore, some people really loved the ending but it was nothing really new or ground-breaking and ever since ‘Close Encounters of the Third Kind’, we have had already many other SF features showing aliens who might not be so bad after all. Anywayt, o conclude, even though I had some rather mixed feelings about this one, it definitely had some potential and it is not bad at all so I still think it is worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I hope there would be more movies like this one (2011´s "Another Earth" is another btw) where the sci-fi element is used in an alternative, "what if", way in the background. Here the alien element is not the center of the story but part of the scenery. The movie works between two characters who are believable enough to be likeable in some extreme (but not overboard) situations with a truly amazing background that happens to have some monsters.

Usually, in movies, if monsters from outer space come to Earth their influence is global, absolute, terrible and the center of the story. Here is just something happening locally that people just endures while living their lives. I find that fresh and realistic where some other could think "boring" and "useless". That´s the way I am, i guess.

Talking a bit about some other movie issues I must say that the pace is nice, slow but always moving with enough going on to keep you interested but relaxed. It´s kinda an ambient movie were things evolve more than happen. The acting is nice because it feels natural most of the time and when it doesnt you just wont care. The filming is beautiful and the special effects work great. Sometimes the movie tries too hard to be pretty and moving but that´s not so bad because it works.

This is not a horror movie, it´s not an action movie, it´s not even a thriller or a love movie. It´s a highbrow scifi movie and it´s also a not so subtle critic view of the differences between the USA´s and Mexico´s people, goverments and ways of living.

Alien monsters that happen to be in an indie/arty movie? Yes.



PS: Perhaps this should be a 7 over 10 instead an 8 but it´s so special to find a movie like this that it deserves 1 extra point just for existing.

A slow paced road trip fleeing aliens and fear. The special effects were so low key, I thought I was looking at reality. The scares were unseen and around the corner like a good Hitchcock movie. I very much recommend this movie.

The very simplistically-titled MONSTERS tries to do a lot in its short running time. It tries to be a quasi dramatic romance, a monster thriller, and a critique of U.S. immigration policy. Of those three things, it does a more than good job at the first one (thanks to a solid script), a lackluster and unoriginal job at the second one, and as for the third third thing, well, it's kind of hit-and-miss.

Chaos is taking place in both the U.S. and Central America as a result of some creatures that have spawned recently, and the situation is so intense that a massive wall has been built in the border between California and Mexico. Although Andrew (Scoot McNairy) is American, he's currently in Costa Rica, and when he enters a hospital looking for a girl, we instantly assume he's looking to get his girlfriend out of there, but it turns out it's just his boss' daughter, Samantha (Whitney Able). Andrew has been given strict orders to get Samantha safely across the border. As Andrew and Samantha make their way towards the border, they're basically forced to spend a lot of time together. Samantha is engaged, though we quickly get a lot of signs that all isn't necessarily going well in that department. After a few drinks, Andrew is okay with being more forward and trying to see if he can spend the night in Samantha's room, but she doesn't think it's a great idea.

These initial scenes are quite good. After several minutes had elapsed of Andrew and Samantha interacting with nothing else happening in the movie, I was more than ready to forget about the titular characters and just focus on these two people. Of course, though, once they start getting closer to the destination, the monsters surface and so do some of the film's flaws. I wouldn't have had a problem with this in the least bit if, during these "suspense" sequences, it would've been easy for us to root for Andrew and Samantha to survive the attacks and that maybe all that adversity would lead Samantha to relent emotionally, but the problem is that the monster chase sequences are simply dull and generic. Nothing interesting to see here - they feel pointless.

As for the film's obvious condemnation of U.S. immigration policy, the results are mixed. On the one hand, there's some brilliant irony during several scenes in which our American characters are forced to ask their lower-hemisphere counterparts for help, in particular a moment in which a Latin American woman gives food and shelter to Andrew and Samantha. On the other hand, some of the criticism is just too bloody obvious. Once our protagonists make it to the border, a character says "It's different looking at America from the outside in"... okay, so far, a little cliche, but not too bad, but THEN he adds: "... in our little, perfect suburban homes." It's a little surprising that a script that was so good at depicting romantic awkwardness in those early scenes stumbles like this towards the end.

However, the reason why the film ultimately deserves a recommendation is due to how different and interesting the film's ending is. The "monsters" switch from being threatening to being something else that you may not expect. And, without spoiling anything, I'll just say that the final moment between Andrew and Samantha is like a punch to the gut. Emotionally, the moment isn't easy to take but therein lies the strength of that final scene.

I do have to make reference to something that has been mentioned in tons of reviews (by both critics and users) and that has been, um, bothering me a little bit. It's the whole "OMG I can't believe this movie was made for only $15,000! Look at how much they did with just that. Maybe I didn't like it so much, but you GOTTA at least give it credit for that." I'd like to talk about how thoroughly WRONG it is to praise a movie for something like this. You see, the fact that the movie was made for $15,000 is something you discovered only because you did research on the movie... so, what would have happened if you did NOT have that piece of information? Was it going to change your mind about what rating to give it? We shouldn't base our assessment of a movie on what resources the filmmakers had, because we often don't KNOW what they were - we weren't there on set. We're supposed to evaluate a movie on the FINISHED PRODUCT we see on the screen, regardless of how they got there. It's like praising someone for studying super hard for an exam, even if the person just gets an average grade; you just HAPPEN to know that the person studied a lot, so you praise them for it despite the final product, while the person who evaluated the test probably has no idea that the person studied a lot, and they definitely weren't gonna take that factor into account when giving them the grade. What's gonna happen if someday you no longer have access to information that tells you what resources filmmakers have or didn't have to make a movie? My rating for MONSTERS would be the same if it had been made by James Cameron. It would be ludicrous for people who are giving this film a good rating to have switched to a lower rating if Cameron directed it, claiming "WTF, Cameron could've done so much more with this!". It's about the FINAL PRODUCT, NOT about the behind-the-scenes aspects that we're not necessarily always privy to.

So, after that long tangent, I'll conclude by saying that MONSTERS is a decent cinematic effort. It's marred by an overdose of formula in the action-based sequences, but there are more than enough solid moments between its two leads to make for a satisfying experience. The last time I saw Scoot McNairy on a film, his character was also sharing a lot of dialogue with a female character. That was IN SEARCH OF A MIDNIGHT KISS, one of 2008's best films. While I can't give MONSTERS the same amount of praise, it may be something you'd like to check out when it comes out in indie theaters during the next few weeks.