Horrornews is a discussion forum for true horror fans to discuss the more obscure areas of the horror/cult/exploitation film genre as well as current theatrical horror.

Moderator: Chris Slack

Post Reply
User avatar
Remo D
Posts: 1260
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2000 10:00 pm
Location: Marina, CA U.S.A.


Post by Remo D » Mon Nov 15, 2010 4:40 pm

Well, the ad hype relies too much on the blurb "The greatest giant monster movie EVER" (or words to that effect), but we know better. We know that this is the opposite of something like SKYLINE... this is the "arthouse" monster movie in which the monsters rarely actually appear.

The aliens (giant jellies--derived from actual marine life but consequently resembling the Japanese DOGORA creatures) landed in Mexico six years ago. So the attempted containment process has resulted in a large chunk of the country (right on the Mex/U.S. border) has been designated an "infected zone." A photojournalist working in Mexico finds himself obliged to see that his employer's daughter receives safe passage from Mexico to the U.S. And in the meantime, he hopes to get to know her a bit better. Long story short, he gets drunk and does something stupid, and the two of them find themslves obliged to navigate the Infected Zone to get back to America.

Between this, MACHETE and DISTRICT 9, you don't have to reach very far to see a certain level of social commentary, so we'll leave that discussion for everybody else. MONSTERS is far more successful in focusing on the plight of "just plain folks" caught up in the crisis--there's some very sobering and realistic material concerning the culture of Mexico and how it responds to the goings-on, the two leads are very accessible, and there's at least one well-staged "siege" sequence to look forward to. But as I said earlier, despite their being the title characters, don't look for the "monsters" to steal the show.

So we get good, believable human drama, and the film is sufficiently different from DISTRICT 9 (and, presumably, SKYLINE) to stand on its own... but that doesn't automatically make it a "great" movie. I happen to think (for instance) that something like this deserves a strong conclusion... if you're going to spend the entire movie getting to know two people in particular, you ought to get something more than the abrupt "Okay, but THEN what?" fadeout that MONSTERS offers.

In the end, it's a sincere attempt that makes the most of its low budget, but MONSTERS still falls short of its potential.

User avatar
Chris Slack
Posts: 5499
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 1999 12:00 pm
Location: Everett WA USA

Re: Monsters

Post by Chris Slack » Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:43 pm

I liked this quite a bit but thought that the ending sucked. The less is more approach to showing the monsters worked well in this one. The scenes of the ruined countryside were particularly effective in creating atmosphere and the sound design was quite good.

User avatar
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 1:36 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Monsters

Post by Kimberly » Sun Jan 02, 2011 7:43 pm

so upset i missed this. it played for a week... but with the holidays and such missed it :/

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests