Page 1 of Gareth Edwards` Monsters

Well, I just picked this up at the weekend, having wanted to watch it since Ben Franklin entered that 48 hour short sci-fi movie competition. Edwards won the 2008 competition of course, and that got him the recognition needed for Vertigo films to sign him up to make this movie.

I`ve read David Becket`s review (after having watched the movie): http://www.myreviewer.com/Monsters_Blu-ray_Review/a141282

While I agree with David that it`s amazing to see this and appreciate that it cost just $200,000 to make, was filmed in 7 weeks, and only featured 2 actual actors, with everyone else merely being locals getting $10 for ad-libbing in front of Edwards` movie camera, I was disappointed over-all.

I wanted to love it - the reviews all over the cover suggested non-stop action. Yeah, I was constantly pausing it and wandering off to find something to eat or to check Facebook - never a good sign, surely?

As I watched it, I noticed that the dialogue seemed extremely disjointed. In the "making of" documentary, Edwards` admitted that he just got the actors to ad-lib along with the general storyline, while he would film them from different angles, constantly moving round them. Then he would edit 90 minutes of movie down to a 3 minute scene, and as none of their dialogue was ever repeated, he would have to edit it so that what they said made sense. Well, this gave me a bit of a headache, to be honest. It was glaringly obvious that there was no script, and the amount of cuts and changes of camera angles made me feel a bit dizzy. At one point I actually shouted at the TV, "For God`s sake, stop walking round them and just film them from one spot!"

The CGI, all achieved in hotel rooms on normal PCs using Adobe software, was stunningly good, although there was not enough action. It`s all very well "placing" tanks in the road, and blown up building, crashed military vehicles etc, but they are all dormant. We only saw "monsters" 3 or 4 times in the whole movie, and this made it plod along far too slowly for my liking.

So who else has seen it? How did you feel about it? While I was impressed at how much could be achieved by one man and the smallest crew ever, it really needed a bit more "va-va-voom" to increase the excitement factor for me.

I`d agree completly.

First time I watched it, we turned off as my girlfriend and brother lost interest about 15minutes in.

I then had it on the "to watch" pile for ages and only got around to it again a few weeks ago. I`d thought it would be more a film for me than them.

I didn`t expect there to be much action either in fairness, but still the film just didn`t grip me.

I found myself more impressed with how much it was made for etc, rather than actually enjoying the film.

www.last.fm/user/1mills

It`s not supposed to be an action flick, it`s a character study. The marketing mis-sold the film. I still think it`s very good though.

It was most definitely mis-marketed, in a big way.  I haven`t watched all the making of docs yet, or heard all of the commentary, and I intend to, because how it came to be is very interesting. But I doubt I`ll ever watch the movie again, or recommend it to anyone.

I thought it was a superb film, but admittedly not for everyone.  I`m not a huge fan of road movies, but that is what this one turned out to be albeit someone trying to get home through a huge tract of land that had been infected by aliens.  To me it had elements of District 9, where you see the aftermath of the infection but you don`t get to see it happen - this gives you much more room to explore and provides you with plenty of atmosphere already inbuilt, and you`re not wasting time showing it.

Monsters to me was a good exploration cinematically of what it would be like to live in the aftermath of an alien invasion in the same way that Battle: Los Angeles was of showing initial military response to an alien invasion but without all the preamble...

---------

Si Wooldridge
Reviewer



http://synth.myreviewer.com

We just watched it, was disappointed thought it was ok, but again probably due to front of box saying "Action packed" etc :(

Not boring, but found it a bit dull for the most part, the characters weren`t that interesting.


Much preferred Cloverfield and District 9.

SPOILER:
Also, why is it, so many film makers are obsessed by trying to be Tarantino and messing around with the time, but not saying "2 days ago" or whatever, so you get to the end, and go "oh, he`s done that thing where the beginning of the film was actually the end, very clever"

This item was edited on Saturday, 3rd September 2011, 21:59

I think you`re giving Tarantino too much credit. It`s not like he invented that particular cinematic trope and its use in Monsters isn`t even the same.

Heads up...

Film 4 showing this on Thursday, 9pm.

Going to throw in another recommendation for this, for anyone who hasn`t seen it.

I`m with Si- i thought this was a really unique take on an individual situation, much like Battle Los Angeles.
Certainly a very quiet, beautifully shot film though, and not the alien invasion specactular some perhaps expected. It actually remeinded me somewhat of Lost in Translation.   

---

Michael Campbell
Columnist/Reviewer

I enjoyed it, but watched it knowing it wasnt what it was marketed as, I agree that it was horribly mis-marketed as an action monster movie so can understand why folks going to see it expecting an action monster movie would be disappointed and give it negative reviews, watching the extras on the Blu-ray about the daily editing in makeshift studios with laptops and hard drives ballanced on suitcases and the fact the SFX were all done on a shoestring budget (model planes and clingfilm wrapped torches in a bathtub, even the subtle sign replacement) adds to the enjoyment of the film for me that a very good film can be made in such a fashion. Its well worth a watch, just dont go into it expecting an action monster adventure....

---

"If I had time....and a hammer, I`d track down every bootleg copy and smash it........"
- George Lucas


My Collection

This item was edited on Monday, 14th November 2011, 22:38