User Reviews

I just sat through this rental. Barely stayed awake.

This seemed like the type of sleeper hit that is missed by the masses, but I really enjoy in rental. Boy was I wrong. This movie was just plain boring.

I knew from a previous review that this movie was not filled with aliens and not filled with special effect. "Cool," I thought, "a movie with a story about people." But nope. There's just not enough story here to keep a viewer awake. The two main characters do enjoy a wee bit of development. But that happens almost immediately - or at least we can see what it is. So the "story" goes nowhere.

Also, these characters didn't talk enough to each other. The movie too suddenly, too often, and for too long falls back on montages of supposed dialogue, overshadowed by mood music. So their story together just isn't believable.

Almost an okay movie. But just plain sleepy.

A week after seeing it, I still feel that Monsters was the most maddening film I saw at this year's Toronto International Film Festival. It had quite a bit of hype surrounding it, specifically around young first-time director Gareth Edwards and what he managed to pull off with a $15,000 budget, and ideas similar to last year's breakout smash, District 9. I stayed away from trailers to remain unspoiled by the potential genius at work, and went in with some fairly high expectations.

These expectations appear to be integral to how maddening an experience watching the film continues to be.

Monsters takes place six years in the future, after a NASA probe containing alien DNA crash lands in Mexico. Alien life begins to appear, and much of the area gets cordoned off as an "Infected Zone". Enter photographer Andrew Kaulder (Scoot McNairy), who is tasked with the assignment of getting his boss' daughter Samantha (Whitney Able) from Mexico back to her home in the States safely. Regular boat or air travel offer no help, so Andrew is forced to trek through the Infected Zone to bring Samantha home.

Besides dumping any expectations you may have for Monsters, I immediately also suggest disregarding any comparisons to District 9 or Cloverfield. Outside of the inventive, overused hand-held camera-style filmmaking, the idea of alien segregation and the (significantly) cheap production budget, Monsters shares nothing with either of these two films. This is a movie all its own, that may owe a bit of imagination and drive to those films, but should not be compared to them. Both of those films offered a visceral, blazingly unique experience that few films have replicated since. Their ingenious marketing campaigns only helped strengthen the ideas in the films, and the Academy even felt District 9 worthy of a historic Best Picture nomination.

But Monsters will likely not have any of that. It is a very slow moving, very emotionally driven film. There are some action scenes (including a rather amazingly well done opening scene, shot entirely through night vision), but the majority of the film is spent focused on the relationship between Andrew and Samantha, and is frequently very quiet. A comparison to a film like Before Sunrise/Before Sunset is not totally out of the question here – you just need to add aliens. Hopefully this more apt comparison does not turn off intrigued viewers, although it may attract more. But it likely will drop anyone's expectations significantly. I know I was not prepared to watch an indie drama, but that is much closer a description to what it actually is.

This is where the problem I had with the film lies. Because it spends so much time on the two characters, it frequently feels very dragged out and boring. I was interested in the plight of Andrew and Samantha from the beginning, but by the end of the film, I really felt like I could care less. There is an emotional drive at work throughout the film that really feels punctuated in some heartwrenching scenes. But the film never seems able to engage the viewer for more than a few instants, before reverting to drawn out, lingering shots and emphasized silence. It makes for an uncomfortable viewing experience in some spots as you wait for the science fiction/horror elements to take over, but also because you just cannot decide whether you should continue watching or just move onto something else.

The actors themselves are both rather great, bringing emotional and authentic notions to their characters. We never really learn much about either character outside of a few minute details, but we do get to see them grow as people desperate to find their way in the world. Despite their undeniable chemistry (the pair were dating at the time of filming and are now expecting a child at the time of the festival screening), I found McNairy's performance to be the stronger of the two. He gets the most dialogue, and bares the majority of the emotional brunt throughout the film, and the toll it takes on him shows right through in the last half of the film. This is not to say Able does not perform excellently – her long, silent stares just do not have the emotional depth of the major moments for McNairy.

Complaints and disappointments aside, the real reason for any hype whatsoever is the beauty and horror captured on camera. The film is very gritty and real, and for good reason. The sets are all taken from real places, and the extras are local people in these areas. When we see decimated buildings and towns which the film blames the aliens for, we are actually looking at real areas that look like this in various parts of the world. But when they are captured as merely a background for our characters to walk past or interact with, there is a still beauty that only a film this cheap could capture. It makes for rather horrific sights in most cases, but just the sheer magnitude of what Edwards captures on film is enough to make you reconsider any wavering thoughts you had on the film.

The special effects, used very sparingly and subtly, are absolutely magnificent for what the budget allows. They do not have the slick Hollywood shine, but they are rather incredible to see in action anyway. Edwards did most of, if not all, the work himself, and the labour that went into creating the effects is not lost in its transition to the big screen.

Monsters remains a maddening experience for me because while I will incur that I was incredibly disappointed by it, I have also come to appreciate what Edwards was able to do with such a small amount of money. Go in with small expectations, and you just may come out surprised by the experience.

7/10.

(An edited version of this review also appeared on http://www.geekspeakmagazine.com).

Hmm, monsters crash landing in Mexico, and we try to keep them contained so they don't enter the US. Sounds familiar.

We also shot missiles at them when we can't even see the,. Again, sounds like the way we are waging war in Pakistan.

This isn't your typical monster film. They aren't really monsters, but aliens. We don't see them, but we know they are there.

The film doesn't rely on special effects, it is the story of Andrew (Scoot McNairy) and Samantha (Whitney Able) and their escape from Mexico.

Despite the misleading title, this is essentially a romance, with sci-fi added. It's an adventure in exotic jungle locations. If you enjoy a good jungle adventure, then you'll probably like this movie.

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.

"Monsters" is a film I might not recommend if it weren't for the fact that the film is amazingly good considering its budget was a paltry $500,000! How did they make it so cheap? They used very small film crews and literally went across the Mexican countryside filming it on the fly. Many of the special effects were apparently added later using computers--and you sure can't tell that so many corners were cut except for one thing--like so many 'found footage films' (and this technically isn't one), the movie relies on a jerky hand-held camera. It's not terribly jerky but it is a bit distracting.

When the story begins, you learn that a probe accidentally brought back lethal life from off world. As a result 'things' have grown huge and out of control and have taken over the northern half of Mexico. The Americans have responded, apparently, by attacking these creatures and have tried to erect a barrier to keep them out of the country. Two Americans, a photo journalist and his boss' daughter meet up--and the boss insists the guy get her back to the States as soon as possible...but it won't be easy. Eventually, it means going through the contaminated zone--where these huge octopus- like creatures have run amok.

The story has it's slow parts--many in fact. But despite this, the story is compelling and the monsters look awfully good for such a paltry budget. Overall, a unique and worthwhile film that is very watchable provided you cut it a bit of slack due to the conditions and costs involved.

If there is one thing that critics can agree on it is that Monsters is a brilliant film and that it marks a turning point where special effects are possible on a low-budget, thus ending Hollywood's rule – forever. So, it was quite the nice surprise to find that this film, having only just come out in the UK, was one of those featured on a recent flight I was on. I know that a tiny screen on a plane is not the place the makers wanted me to watch it but I did so anyway, so perhaps some may wish to take my opinion in that context? I don't know.

Anyway, I tried to ignore the hype and just come to the film as fresh as I could, wary of anything that is overly praised just because I have been burnt before. What I found with Monsters though was a film that was worthy of the praise, but just not for the reasons that everyone was saying. Made on a comparatively tiny budget with a tiny crew and with special effects done on a laptop, this film is worthy of praise for how it was made and the fact that it is reasonably good despite being made rather on the fly. This is why I think that so many critics have been quick to praise it – because it does show that "big" effects movies can be done for less than the disgusting budget of films like Transformers 2 and so on. You already know where i'm going, so let me just get there – to me, the praise has been spread beyond this aspect in a way that the film doesn't totally deserve.

Watching it for myself I could see lots going on but the word that flooded my mind was "nearly". In terms of the overall sweep of the film, while some have talked about immigration for me the film is an allegory for Afghanistan. We have the "monsters" in a set area that is heavily attacked by the military – attacks which do more harm to the innocents in the area than the monsters themselves do. At this level it is quite clever but the film never makes more of this, leaving it as it is and not making comment beyond showing the news footage of the monsters as being background noise in the way war coverage (sadly) has become for many of us – the norm. Below this we have what is essentially a road-movie where the two characters fall for each other and also make their own journeys in regards the monsters. Again this is "OK" but never really comes off in the way it should. The improvised dialogue works against the film in my opinion. It should have been well-honed dialogue – writers get paid for a reason, it is because generally written material is better than that made up on the spot. So it is here and the film misses the chance to let the dialogue be the driver for the allegory and the relationship and the character development. As it is the film is "nearly" there on this aspect.

The characters did bug me a but because they were not as strong as suggested. Able and McNairy deserve credit for their efforts and their reasonably natural performances but they deserved a better script (or any script). Chatting naturally they do not help the overall film and it is a shame that again their performances are a case of "nearly" or "if only....". I can't stand in the way of praise for Edwards though as his drive and skill made this film. His effects are used sparingly but they are impressive (small screen or not). His use of them is clever because it frees the film up to do much more than just be an effects movie – it is just a shame then that his material doesn't actually delivery in the space left for it.

Overall Monsters is a reasonably good film but it is one that could and should have been better in key regards. The nature of the making should be praised to the rooftop but the film itself falls short. It is never as smart as it thinks it is, never as engaging as it should be and never has the commentary that it surely needed. Worth a look and well worth supporting but in my opinion the gushing noise from the critics is more to do with the fact it is a low budget success rather than a brilliant film generally.

Monsters is a really good debut for writer, director & cinematographer Gareth Edwards, proving he understands the sci-fi genre as well as extremely efficient low budget filmmaking. It's an indie romance set against the backdrop of a world inhabited by giant monsters with a clear love of Steven Spielberg's filmography.

Scoot McNairy and Whitney Able are pretty much the only characters in the film, the mundane conversations and their palpable growing affection for each other is equally as investing as any of the tension filled monster set pieces. Scoot in particular gets to show a level of dramatic heft too rarely seen in his bigger projects.

Gareth Edwards direction is very ambitious and all the better for it, on such a small budget he's able to create a world that feels so big and lived in. Thematically, it's very bold and messy work but with a clear passion from Edwards and an understanding of how this genre can be used as a metaphor for current world issues.

Monsters' concept was fairly simple, which is both a good and bad thing.

The good thing is that it allows the viewer to concentrate on the plot without alot of convulsion. Ironically, the bad thing is the plot is too linear and inept to be effective.

Although the male and female leads were allowed to ad lib most of the movie, and they are married in real life, there just didn't seem to be any chemistry between them. This is because their characters were not given sufficient time or events, to bond. There is nothing in Monsters that justifies their relationship, and since the movie is concentrated on their relationship, and these huge monsters we know very little about, then the end result is the viewer feeling empty. I have to blame this on poor scriptwriting, and maybe poor producing, as this 1 1/2 hour movie needed at least 30 - 40 more minutes to make things work.

Decent special effects, a nice concept, and excellent locale shooting could not save this movie. I enjoyed Monsters, but was very unsatisfied at the end.

6/10- great mood and cinematography ruined by poor actor chemistry.

Half of Mexico has been quarantined, having been taken over by alien creatures brought back to Earth by a space probe. American newspaper photographer Andrew Kaulder (Scoot McNairy) is tasked with escorting his boss's daughter Samantha (Whitney Able) to the safety of the US via ferry, but the pair are forced to travel to the border through the 'infected' zone when their passports are stolen by a bar floozy with whom Andrew spends a tequila-fuelled one night stand (could have been worse, I suppose: he might have got his own 'infected zone south of the border' into the bargain).

Technically speaking, there ARE monsters in Monsters, but the total time that they are on screen cannot amount to more than a few scant minutes. The rest of this low-budget indie film focuses on the two Americans as they get to know and fall for each other against a backdrop of chaos, and ultimately discover that they might not be so different to the aliens that they have been so afraid of. In other words, Monsters is a very dull, extremely talkative character study/romance that will no doubt frustrate and anger those viewers lured in by its misleading title, deceptive marketing and intriguing basic premise; even those forearmed with the knowledge that this isn't a special effects laden monster smack-down might still be surprised at just how slow and uneventful the film actually is.

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. ;)

First off to all the other reviewers, we don't need a lengthy synopsis in ever single review, the story is right there on the main page.

It's a good film, its a love story but for us guys its not so in you're face about it, by the time you get to the end it suddenly occurs to you that you've just been tricked into watching a chick flick. You know how in action films its explosions and gun battles but there is always a romantic aspect to keep the girlie's interested, well in this film its reversed.

When i first saw it i actually thought to myself this must have cost them a few bob, when i heard it was 15 grand I nearly spat my crunchy nut cornflakes out and for that i give it a solid 7/10.

Watch it.

This should be called "Boredom" instead, absolutely pointless!

Acting seems stupid, certain explanations are left out, and it's just a waste of an hour and 30 minutes of your life!!!

Please don't watch, you'll be bored with the lack of "Monsters", the lack of any action, the lack of casualties, and the halfway stupid love story mixed into it, it is trying to go all over the place, but isn't getting it right in any direction, absolutely horrible!!!

1 / 10 if i could give it any lower, i would, it's such a pointless thing to watch, pollen numbers are more interesting, that's how sad this waste of production is...

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.

Six years after Earth has suffered an alien invasion a cynical journalist (Scoot McNairy) agrees to escort a shaken American tourist (Whitney Able) through an infected zone in Mexico to the safety of the US border.

Roger Ebert awarded the film three and a half out of four stars and said "Monsters holds our attention ever more deeply as we realize it's not a casual exploitation picture." That is both the strength and the weakness of the picture. We find that it is more of a human drama -- which is good -- but does not really involve many monsters, which may be a disappointment for some viewers.

I love that there was no intention to make a commentary on the US-Mexican border, despite that being a key part of the film. For whatever reason, America is safe while Mexico is not. That suggests a political statement, but one just is not there, if Gareth Edwards is to be believed.

As I write this (August 2013), a sequel is on the way. Not sure that is a good idea, but it is too late to stop them now...

Man, I'm so irritated with this movie I can hardly contain myself! I read reviews that this movie is magnificent, so I wanted to watch it for the longest time, and I am to say the least completely let down. Utterly boring and pretentious! I watched the entire thing wondering what was going on, after about 30 minutes with nothing happening I decided to just give up trying to enjoy it and just try staying awake. The idea had potential, but really nothing actually happens! You hardly even see the darn aliens that are supposed to be 100 metres tall! It felt like one long soap drama episode with only faint hints of aliens in the background. Also, none of the characters seem to care that gigantic aliens have arrived on earth after decades of wondering if we're alone or not, which should be subject for serious discussion, but all the characters seem to care about is taking photos, gazing contemplatively at sunsets and the possibility of getting off with each other. Oh, and don't give me any of that rubbish that the aliens are integrated with the daily lives of the humans, so they hardly notice each other, if that was the case, then what's the point of having aliens in the movie? Avoid at all costs!!!