Quick Take: Monsters

Notice the lacks of the title creatures in the movie poster?
I was sorely disappointed by two things I had high hopes for yesterday. One was a book, the other was the movie "Monsters."

The Gareth Edwards, done the cheap, Godzilla-takeoff has earned high praise. It is still floating a 71% on Rottentomatoes.com.

It was an interesting premise. Alien creatures landed in Mexico years ago and are impossible to kill off, so they quarantine the area. It's like having Godzilla permanently living in your backyard.

Except, this isn't Godzilla's story. This is more like Cloverfield (without the money, bad acting, and shakey cam) because it focuses on the people impacted by the monsters.

It may as well have been set in 1990s Bosnia, 1970s Vietnam, or  Civil War America- the impact of the monsters is so tangential to the story it was as if this was just a love story told against the backdrop of ruin and bad location (ie a warzone).

The love story isn't all there either. Apparently, they just took these two actors and plopped them into Central America. Everyone they are acting against is supposedly native.

The locations are great, Edwards does prove himself adept with the special effects. However, so much takes place at night and in the dark, it becomes such an obvious cheat.

If you go into this with realistic expectations, you might enjoy it, but even at a trim 90 minutes it still felt long.
The director is being handed the reigns to a new Godzilla film. I really hope it is for other work and not this.
Next PostNewer Post Previous PostOlder Post Home