Monster

You've probably all figured out by now that this is the straight-to-video knock-off of the much anticipated "Cloverfield". I was pretty curious about this, partly because it comes from The Asylum (their stuff is just addictively bad!) and because the trailer for it looked nearly competent. So naturally I rented it as soon as I had the chance.

The plot (ha!) concerns two women, a documentary crew, who fly to Tokyo to interview an official about global warming. Everything in the movie is filmed vacation-video style from the girls' hand-held camera (just like "Cloverfield"). During the interview the monster attacks and the city becomes a disaster area. Our heroes are forced to run for cover and try to find people who speak English while still documenting the monster's rampage.

I expected weak CGI effects and bad dialogue, but I was also disappointed to find that the hand-held camera wasn't hand-held looking at all (the making-of feature on the DVD betrayed their real techniques) and the down-time that fills out most of the movie happens in spots that look more like L.A. than Tokyo. Transitions are accomplished with unconvincing video distortion, an attempt to sell us on the gimmick that we are watching found footage. There's an attempt at explanation for the monster too, which was perhaps the worst aspect of this mess.

"Monster" may be The Asylum's worst. In spite of a good trailer, this will be forgotten especially because they chose a title already used for a Charlize Theron movie. "Cloverfield" has nothing to fear from this.

Okay maybe this is not a rip-off of Cloverfield, and maybe I should not have watched it a few days after said movie. But still, Monster is almost exactly the same with chicks (you could sell anything with chicks, right?), without a decent plot, acting, and sadly, without a monster.

We get two girls who are in Japan to make a documentary, when Tokyo is hit by an earthquake. And this is when the movie starts to get irreversibly bad and annoying. Because the two girls, however cute they may be, just cannot seem to use the camera. In the middle of a monster attack, *everything* is filmed, except for what is actually happening. When our heroines are staring with their jaws dropped at something supposedly terrible, the camera is well... showing them, their jaws dropped, staring. Then cut, or artifacts on the film (at every 5 seconds, or when something interesting is about to happen), and we go to the next scene. Rinse and repeat. In the end, we are given 90 minutes of artifacts, girls being scared and talking nonsense, running somewhere (filming each other's legs in the process), and just hanging out in Tokyo, obviously afraid of some tentacle monster that they always fail to capture with the camera.

Besides of not being able to make a point (it is hard when you point the camera at your sister instead of at whatever is happening around you), the movie fails to convey a sense of plot. We know where the girls are trying to go, but we just do not care if they ever get there, or what happens if they do. There is simply no drama, no excitement, mostly due to the bad use of camera, and the long talky scenes, and short scary ones (usually cut by artifacts, or simply, darkness).

I can't help but to compare this movie to Cloverfield, where you got a monster, and after some time, you actually got interested in where the group is going, and in the end, you cared. Monster could have been a great movie, even without showing the monster, if it manages to make you feel for the girls, but it sadly fails. It is not simply bad, but also an uninteresting movie.

The entire movie is two young women, attractive but nothing special, with rather flat and uninteresting personalities running around Tokyo during some kind of giant octopus attack. The special effects are not very special, the monster is never really seen other than partial glimpses, there is zero in the way of plot intrigue and plenty of annoying focus on the two characters. They cry. They get their faces dirty. They crawl around in the caves. They run the camera but it's hard to understand some of the shots since nobody is holding or controlling the camera.

This goes on and on. And on. And on. What were they thinking? Then, as if this vacuous mess were insufficiently annoying, every 30 seconds or so the "damaged film" effects kick in, disrupting the continuity and interfering with what little actual "action" there is in the film.

Actually making it through this movie is an exercise in futility. You keep hoping it will either get better or end. I'm about 20 minutes from the finish as I am writing this. It sounds like there is a battle going on but you can't see anything -- another "damaged film" special.

Yikes. Don't bother. Do yourself a favor and just don't bother.

It starts out OK and has a decent premise to it. But after about the first 15 minutes it turns into a complete waste of time and do not waste your time by watching this.

If there is a thousand ways to disrupt a video feed in order to make it look like it's been badly damaged, these girls have now found 1200 ways. The cutting of the video feed had a purpose, I know that, but it was an annoying feature in this film. It almost made me go crazy, but I stuck with it just to see the rest and be able to give this film a fair judgment. The film (idea) itself is not bad at all. The acting has one or maybe two decent moments (although Erin is kinda cute (when she's not sobbing)). The script is just wonderful. It had the potential of being a new Orson Welles's 1938 radio broadcast The War of the Worlds, but unfortunately it just had the intention, but not the drive to actually make it. But honestly I think you should spend your 90 minutes on collecting navel lint instead. In the long run it'll do you much more good than watching this. I watched it - so you wont have to.