.post-body img, .post-body .tr-caption-container, .Profile img, .Image img, .BlogList .item-thumbnail img { padding: 0px !important; background: none !important; border: none !important; -moz-box-shadow: 0px 0px 0px transparent !important; -webkit-box-shadow: 0px 0px 0px transparent !important; box-shadow: 0px 0px 0px transparent !important; }

Tuesday, May 14, 2013

Monsters (2010) - LetterboxD Review


Link to Original Review

A slightly more contextual review than normal but it seem only fitting to look at Gareth Edwards first feature film "Monsters" in the context in which it was made.

Anyone wanting to gain a greater appreciation of the scale of achievement that this film has achieved should look no further than the sumptuously long making of features on the blu ray where in the opening few minutes, you find out that Monsters had a production cast and crew of 6 people. 4 crew and 2 [primary] cast. The budget was estimated to be between $15,000 and $800,000 (the upper end of the budget may be explained away by post production and distributional / promotional costs - the $15,000 is more likely to represent the flat production cost). Whichever way you look at it, whatever your feelings about the film as a piece of entertainment, bringing such a technically accomplished film in for under a million greenbacks is possibly one of the greatest achievements in modern cinema.

OK, budget and technical achievements aside, how does the film stack up as a piece of entertainment? It should come as no surprise to anyone who has already seen my rating of the film, but subjectively, as the kind of film I like, I think this film absolutely rocks.

Admittedly, you do have to suffer through a slightly tedious and clunky exposition heavy first 10-15 minutes, but once the proverbial has hit the fan and our two main protagonists are left with no other choice than to go through the "infected" zone. Minor quibble to start off with, Andrew Kaulder is a bit of a dick and if I were a rich businessman, I would NOT be entrusting my daughters safety to a guy who clearly, at the start of the film, is a bit of a douche. The plot point tha throws the story in to the air and forces the hand into the infected zone is so clunky it defies belief. I mean seriously!

Thankfully, I can get over that little, unfortunate piece of poor scripting (they had no script - just a 35 page outline of a story, then they filmed the remaining 60 or so minutes worth of footage on the fly!) and just enjoy the brilliance that is all around including a small handful of truly brilliant scenes.

1) The sequences in the rainforest - how this was shot on the budget is miraculous but aside from that, its a great fucking scene! Tense, creepy, brilliant! Something frolicking in the river... The reason for the "infected zone". The Mayan temple. The attack. All would be brilliant in any film.

2) The closing sequence. No spoilers here and I accept that it may not be everyone's cup of tea but in the same way that I liked the ending to Danny Boyle's Sunshine, I like the ending to this.

3) The Mexican ticket salesman for the ferry. Not sure why but this guy is awesome. Sticks to his guns. Doesn't take shit. Half expect him to pull out a machete or a shotgun but he doesn't. Calm and sensible. Kind of grounds the film in its attempt at reality.

4) The ghost town. Brilliantly realized and the person they meet, along with her reaction, are brilliant.

All in all, Monsters does work in and out of context but the appreciation of the achievement here should really be taken with an awareness of how the film was made. I guess the big question now is how will Gareth Edwards next film "Godzilla" turn out. Hopefully it will be great because the talent on show required to make Monsters is of the highest caliber.

I rated this movie 5 out of 5!

No comments: