Many of us fear the unknown. Faced with the worst, we can sometimes muster up the courage to press on and endure. On the flip side, the infinite variables of the unforeseen have been known to make many of us lose copious amounts of sleep, and recoil with indecision.
This formula is the engine that drives MONSTERS. Less a film about large scary aliens, and more a story of the wake they leave behind.
The story begins with Andrew (Scoot McNairy). He is an American photojournalist in Mexico covering their response to a spread of alien lifeforms. They have created a quarantined 'Infected Zone' which has taken over the entire northern half of the nation. This area of extraterrestrial outbreak pushes right up against the American border, and has such a dangerous reputation, that safe passage across it costs $5000 USD per person.
Beyond the Infected Zone, in southern Mexico is Samantha (Whitney Able). Samantha's father is Andrew's employer, and Andrew has been tasked with getting the spritely Samantha back to America safely. The two of them get along well enough, but their connection is tested early when they miss their shot at a ferry that will safely get them home across the water.
Desperate, they opt to travel by land, buying passage on a truck that will drive them straight through the infected zone all the way to the American border. Unfortunately, travelling by truck is far more dangerous, and it doesn't take long for Samantha and Andrew to find themselves walking in the footprints of the monsters themselves, and trying to push on as the signs of destruction piles up.
The funny thing is by the time it's all said and done, MONSTERS feels like getting the wrong lunch order, but enjoying what's in the bag anyway.
MONSTERS teaches us that what's more unsettling than moments of mass destruction, is sifting through the rubble left behind. As our hearts race and our adrenaline spikes, we force ourselves to stand our ground to protect those we care about from the noises in the jungle. Finding the same inner strength is much tougher when walking through candlelight vigils, happening upon corpses, or approaching an ominously abandoned checkpoint.
The self preservation isn't there to push us. It's replaced by fearful reluctance that freezes us in place.
That its able to evoke such feelings shows that MONSTERS has done its homework. It has studied the greats of war, science fiction, and of course monster movies, and has lovingly borrowed from them all. Where the film is the most daring, is in the way it wants us to focus on the people running, and less on what they are running from. It's almost a given that we will be captivated by the monsters - this movie tries as hard as it can to make us equally captivated by Andrew and Samantha.
Andrew's place in all of this is especially pointed, since he is both caretaker and journalist. He's promised to get Samantha home in one piece, but on their journey, he witnesses so very much that the journalist in him knows he should be recording. But just as it's difficult to push on despite one's fears, it's likewise difficult to stop bearing witness and start reporting...even if bad news does pay better than bad news by a hefty margin.
While it shouldn't come as a surprise, there's an air of cheekiness to how little time we actually spend with the monsters. It's almost as if the filmmaker is a street performer passing around the hat just before doing that big final trick. It isn't a new trick, but it's still a good trick, since celestial lights under the waterline and disquieting cries coming from the jungle never fail to get us primed for an extraordinary experience. MONSTERS isn't interested in a quickie in the men's room. It's here for the slow seduction...and it ain't putting out until it's darned good and ready.
By keeping the emphasis on Samantha and Andrew's journey, MONSTERS lets us tap into the "what if?" factor. What if a neighbouring country was cut in half by a quarantined zone? What if a toxic danger was so prevalent that we had to use cartoons to teach children how to use gas masks? What if a country like America decided to build an imposing wall to seal off its borders? And what if we found ourselves with certain bedlam between ourselves and our homes. What does one sacrifice just to survive it...and how hard does one fight to get to where they want to be?
More than dazzling you with heady visuals, MONSTERS wants to tap into your brain and drop you into this freaky scenario. And by providing this uneasiness and countering it with moments of true solace and gentle connection, it makes it easy to give the film our money and walk away happy...even though we didn't get what we ordered.
What did you think? Please leave comments with your thoughts and reactions to MONSTERS.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Review: MONSTERS * * *
Posted by
Ryan McNeil
at
10/22/2010 08:00:00 AM
Labels: 3 stars, dvd, gareth edwards, reviews, sci-fi, scoot mcnairy, suspense, whitney able
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)


10 comments:
I'm going to try and order this "on demand" soon. How does it compare to something like District 9?; A film I've heard it shares similarities with.
@ Thomas... I nabbed the ticket when I heard it described as "The Mexican DISTRICT 9". It's not.
There are slight similarities, but this story is less about the visitors than the effect they are having during their visit. More like the first third of D9 than the last two thirds.
Check it out.
I haven't watched this one as sometimes I tend to avoid creepy films but your review made me want to see it.
Of course, I watched 'District 9' and I liked it. So maybe this one would be for me, even if they're slightly different.
Thanks for suggestion.
YOU GAVE THIS PEICE OF SHIT THREE STARS?!
@ Lesya... I'd wager good money that you could handle this film easily - it's more eerie than creepy.
Lookin' forward to reading what you post on it once you see it.
@ Sasha... Oh come on now, I'd wager good money that there are films you loved this year that didn't do it for me.
Are you just mad 'cause I bailed on our Lightbox plan for tonight?
Was that for tonight? Yeah, I wouldn't be able to make it anyway; I'm visiting family in Brampton until Sunday.
And I didn't like this movie at ALL. But I did see the film at the butt-end of the Festival, and I was probably overly-critical.
Direct TV is showing it next Wednesday and I plan to catch it before its official release on Friday.
iTunes had this for rent a few weeks ago and I took a leap of faith, since I probably wouldn't have jumped through all the hoops to see it in the theater. I'm glad to hear it's not too much like District 9, because I didn't care much for that one. I just have to find time to watch it before the rental expires.
Thanks for a nice review! I'll have to check this one out, I haven't heard about it before.
@ Sasha... Yeah our plan was for last night, but I wasn't gonna be able to make it anyway. Some other time.
I'm a firm believer that our mood can affect how much we like/dislike movies. Knowing how much energy you were exerting during TIFF would have me guessing that you were wicked irritable by the end, so that combined with the slight fake-out that this film throws at us would leave me guessing that you might want to revisit it sometime down the road.
@ Alex... I'm intrigued by how the studio has been rolling this out (on-demand access along with/in advance of its theatrical run). What I wouldn't give for more films to go this route!
@ Rachel... Give it a look. Would love to hear your thoughts on it during a future episode of Reel Insight.
@ Joel... Thanks for reading it. Hopefully for you it lives up to the praise I've heaped upon it.
Post a Comment