People often tell me that one reason science fiction is tough to do is because it’s so much more expensive than other genres that require fewer special effects, and there’s something to that, I know. But then along come filmmakers like Gareth Edwards with Monsters (and Jamin Winans with Ink and to some degree, Vincenzo Natali with Splice, and many others) and remind us that science fiction doesn’t have to be about huge amounts of CGI or extensive modeling and practical effects, even, but can – and often should – be just as much about people and ideas.
The monsters in Monsters are the result of a crashed space probe carrying alien samples; when the creatures grow to an enormous size and begin destroying cities in northern Mexico, the entire area is quarantined off as the Infected Zone. Our story hones in on two people, a photojournalist trying to document the creatures and their effect on the surrounding areas and his publisher’s daughter, whom he’s been sent to pick up in Mexico and escort safely back to the United States. The film essentially follows these two on their odyssey, which of course meets obstacles at every turn, eventually forcing them to traverse the Infected Zone on foot.

Despite the title, the creatures are far from the main focus; instead Edwards is content to let the creatures be a sort of omnipresent threat but rarely be physically present – almost an environmental condition causing fear, awe, and fascination. Given the film’s subject, you might expect there to be a gradual buildup of suspense until finally revealing the creatures, but in fact, Edwards shows the huge tentacled monster right in the opening sequence, as part of a frantic night-vision army battle. As he put it during the Q&A, he wanted to get the money shot out of the way first so he could concentrate on the actual story, which is really a character drama about these two people.
That’s not to say that there’s no suspense – a couple of sequences use sound and half-seen monsters to great effect, almost reminiscent of the way Spielberg choreographs the dinosaur attacks in Jurassic Park. I’ve included one such clip below, in lieu of the as-yet-non-existant trailer, in which a barely-seen water monster threatens our band of travelers. Yet most of the story focuses on these two people, who have baggage of their own (the woman is engaged, but from the very beginning there are signs she’s not altogether sure about that future), and their process of getting to know each other in extreme, but somehow not particularly surprising circumstances. That sense of the monsters’ presence being normal and accepted to some degree, though not usually with such proximity, balanced with the interest of finding out generally unknown things about them like the glowing beauty of the eggs they leave on the trees is one of the things I found most captivating about the film.
It’s not perfect, by any means – many people will find Edwards’ insistence on focusing on the couple rather than the monsters maddening, and will especially decry — [SLIGHT SPOILERS] — the lack of a major climactic confrontation with the creatures. And even the two characters are not as complex or as deep as they could be, considering how much the movie depends on them. However, they are charismatic and have excellent chemistry together (which they should; the two actors were already an off-screen couple before this film, and are now married), which goes a long way toward enjoying their banter. Nor does the story go as far as it could into social commentary, though it has its subtle points, I think. And after my slight difficulties with the third-act turn in District 9 (a film that Monsters is going to draw inevitable comparisons to, though it’s a very different beast), I found Monsters‘ quiet reveries and willingness to follow through on its tone and story refreshing. It isn’t an incredible example of thought-provoking science fiction, nor an in-depth character study, nor a mile-a-minute monster movie, but it has enough elements of each of these things that it occupies its own little space on the genre landscape; and Edwards’ command of lovely yet understated special effects combined with a sure sense of camerawork elevated it into something I really enjoyed watching.
Monsters has been picked up for release by Magnolia (who will be releasing it through their sub-label Magnet), with a release date at the end of October.
Directed by Gareth Edwards
Screenplay: Gareth Edwards
Cinematography: Gareth Edwards
Cast: Scoot McNairy, Whitney Able
IMDb
LA Film Fest Guide





(4/5)











I’ve seen reviews on both sides of the fence and am happy to see you liked it Jandy. I didn’t love DISTRICT 9 as universally and everyone else so I’m hoping this is a good sign for MONSTERS.
I haven’t read a lot of other reviews, but I can definitely see how it could garner some negative reviews – it’s one of those films where you can see how it could be absolutely incredible and it doesn’t quite get there (not QUITE deep enough, not QUITE scary enough, not QUITE thoughtful enough), so that could be frustrating if you focus on all the things it could’ve been but isn’t quite. But for what it is, I enjoyed it.
I adored this movie. It’s great. Better than District 9 in my opinion.
I thought you might, Kurt. I think you cared for District 9′s turn even less than I did, and Monsters did a much better job of sticking with what it set out to do in the first place.
I caught this last night and really liked it too. I agree with your statement Jandy that it doesn’t quite hit some of it’s targets as powerfully as it could, but I liked that nothing was pushed in your face or overdone. It does make for a not particularly dramatically satisfying watch, but still I was captivated by it all and hugely admired it’s different approach. It’s definitely going to be hovering in my top 20 of this year.
I think this film could have been great its as if it has not been thought through, i watched it earlier today and i think i almost fell asleep… HELL i was with some one who fell asleep you expect somthing to happen and it just does not! The film is called “monsters” warning there are not many monsters this film would be great with a little more action there was about 10 mins of the film and noone spoke, i am EXTREMELY dissapointed but hey thats just my opinion.
Andrea, your reaction doesn’t surprise me at all – I guessed a lot of moviegoers would feel the way you do. Personally, I really liked that it eschewed the easy way out of giant action scenes and stuck closely with the quiet character moments of people living with this constant but often invisible threat. Also, showing the creatures so little suggests that the “monsters” of the title refer as much to the human beings waging a war of attrition on something they don’t understand as to the creatures themselves.
What a joke of a movie, why even bother to make it. It should be straight to TV only.
I enjoyed this movie, the characters felt gritty and real, thrown into horrible circumstances. I felt they were portrayed quite realistically in that people didn’t try to be heroes, they were just themselves.