That Little Monster

Apart from some interesting camerawork, there's little redeeming value to "That Little Monster"...a very amateurish film with very little to like about it.

This black & white film is about 50 minutes long and is just plain strange. It begins with an overture and then a weird introduction. What follows is very surreal...sort of like "Eraserhead" but supposedly a comedy. It consists of a babysitter trying to care for a child who clearly in some otherworldly monster. It's full of goo, blood and biting...and not much else.

As another reviewer pointed out, most of the reviews that give it 9s or 10s are by people who never reviewed any other movies...making them very suspicious. I cannot say this is the case, but many cheaper films have many such one off reviews and I can only assume they were done by people who made the film or their friends. After all, why register on IMDB to ONLY review this strange film...one that is really obscure!?

Overall, a movie with interesting cinematography and a story that is, at best, bad.

By the way, this is listed among Bob Hope's films but he only is shown in a couple archival clips from old movies...so it's clearly NOT one of his films.

I finally saw this indescribable film tonight! What a splendiferous concoction of visual delights and laughs.

I most loved and appreciated the photography/lighting, the fantastic camera angles and all the imaginatives (the surreal scenes--this is a weak description for what I'm trying to describe).

Paul Bunnell has a good feel for the camera, and how what he sees in the camera will appear to the audience, and what effect if will have.

The humour in this black comedy reminded me of Joe Dante's

"Gremlins."

Of course, I see "Eraserhead" resemblances, from the industrial drone in the beginning, to the different use of time--painfully slow, detailed and bizarre--I love them all.

I liked the composed music (the last chord came to a "resolution," but with very disturbing notes in it). The two songs sung out of the blue by the father--is this what the DVD notes mean by a Gene Autry movie? And that 20's 78rpm record--I liked it.

Was there anything I didn't like? Let me think. Oh, I have more I liked. Forry Ackerman--beautiful lighting, macabre, his delivery was quite fitting. And I like the "heroine's" acting.

Even the length was good--a real "B" film length.

Isn't that funny? I can't think of any criticism. I'm serious. I'll leave it at that.

I can not believe some of the positive comments I've read here. They misled me into seeing this piece of trash. I'm sure many freshman college students taking a 'Film-101' course could do a better job. The acting was poor, the story was predictable, the "little Monster" looked like a plastic doll, and the film dragged to the point you didn't really care anymore what happened as long as it was finally over.

If someone held a gun to my head and said "Say something Positive or you'll soon be as brainless as the director", I'd have to say that at the very least there were some pretty bizarre set pieces. It looked like a world where the Joker from the animated Batman series would feel right at home. Oh and it was nice to see that special cameo appearance at the end by one of Hollywoods all time greats. He must have lost a golf bet or something to end up making an appearance in this turkey.

Skip this one, life is too short.

Paul Bunnell has concocted a wonderfully stylish and surreal movie. "That Little Monster" has tones of David Lynch, Tim Burton, Ed Wood, classic cinema, and the wonderful old Twilight Zones. This film echos the best of stunning Black and White photography. Ranging from the feel of the German Expressionist cinema to the mystery of "Eraserhead". Incredible lighting combines with fantastic framing and camera angles. It is a unique mix of styles, complete with the musical overture of bygone days. The masterful introduction sets the tone. And Bob Hope is a great addition. The world is familiar yet off, adding to the mystery. Absurd, hip, and fun. Paul Bunnell is a talent to watch.

The premise was intriguing but much too shallow to support even a short full length feature. The characters were shallow and uninteresting, as well. The scenes were fractured and added nothing to assist the viewer in understanding the plot or the point of the picture.

The technical aspects of the film, on the other hand, were noteworthy. While some of the cinematography, especially in the opening scenes, was avant garde, those same techniques became blasé' from constant overuse by the end of the feature. While Paul Bunnell shows he has the unique technical ability to make a watch-worthy movie, the lack of any substantial plot, very plastic actors, and disjointed imagery do not so add up to an enjoyable event. Ed Wood, while a most technologically deficient film maker, at least produced somewhat interesting movies. I found this to be the most disappointing movie I have seen since "Weekend at Bernie's."