Monsters (2010)

There are a lot of movies I've checked out solely because they were the works of directors I greatly admire, and I've ended up enjoying most of them, but with this item, it's a bit different: I did check it out because of the director, Gareth Edwards, but it was so I could get a feel for his style so I knew what to expect from a big movie he was directing that I was eagerly waiting for. If you've been following this blog for a long time, you know that I'm a huge fan of Godzilla, to the point where I devoted the better part of 2014 to reviewing all of the movies in that franchise in order to commemorate the release of the Legendary Pictures film. I can't tell you how much I was anticipating that film and I was curious of its young, newcomer director, who'd only done one other film before, one that I'd never even heard of until he was announced as the director of Godzilla. So, when I stumbled across a used copy of the Blu-Ray of Monsters after Christmas of 2013, I saw it as an opportunity to get a handle on the guy. Going in, I wasn't quite sure what to expect. I'd heard something of the plot beforehand but no specifics, and I thought the title was very generic. Ultimately, I figured it would probably be a monster movie that wasn't exactly original but would be stylish and entertaining, akin to something like Neil Marshall's Dog Soldiers (not the best example, since I'm not that big on that movie, but it's the closest thing I could use to describe my expectations for Monsters). I couldn't have imagined that I would get a leisurely-paced, quiet road movie centering around two characters, with the monsters themselves and the havoc they cause being little more than a backdrop. It felt like a science fiction version of The Motorcycle Diaries, and I came out of it feeling very mixed. I thought it was well-shot, especially for the tiny budget I knew it had, and the special effects were pretty good, but I also found it very hard to sit through, as I really didn't care for the two characters I was following or their story, and I especially didn't like the lack of scenes with the monsters or the teasing of an appearance by one, only for nothing to happen (which would become something of a trademark from Edwards, as I would soon learn). It remained a polarizing movie up to when I first did this review, although by then, I'd re-watched a couple of time and, now knowing what I was getting into, I could appreciate it much more and understand what Edwards was trying to accomplish, which was quite amazing given the very limited resources he had, and it did have more of an effect on me. But now, after having gone back to it many times, it's a movie I've come to genuinely like for its visuals, atmosphere, and tone, and I will say that the characters have grown on me as well.

Six years ago, a NASA space probe sent to investigate the possibility of extraterrestrial life crashed into the heart of Mexico, now occupied by alien life-forms that spread like wildfire across the northern region of the country. This area, known as the "Infected Zone," has been completely quarantined, with an enormous wall built across the U.S.-Mexico border to keep the creatures, gigantic, squid-like beasts with numerous, spider-like legs, from reaching the U.S., while American and Mexican troops continuously fight to keep them contained. Photojournalist Andrew Kaulder is sent to a devastated Mexican city to find his employer's daughter, Samantha Wynden, whom he locates in a hospital, nursing an injured arm. However, when Kaulder calls back home, he's tasked with escorting Samantha back to the U.S., much to his chagrin. It also becomes clear the journey will not be an easy one, as the train they initially take is forced to stop because of damaged tracks and they learn if they don't make it back within two days, all means of travel to America will be completely blocked. Upon reaching the coast, Kaulder buys Samantha a very expensive ferry ticket for the following morning but this plan goes south when, the next morning, a local woman he spent the night with steals their passports. With the ferry gone, the two of them now have no choice but to journey straight through the Infected Zone, a dangerous trip that the ticket seller arranges for them after Samantha gives him her expensive engagement ring as payment. As they travel through the zone by boat and then by land, aided by various men, the two of them witness and experience the destruction and fear caused by the creatures and the military attacks on them, but also see something of a beauty in them, and when they finally reach the wall, they realize that both they and the world they knew will never be the same.

Just like his movies, Gareth Edwards is something of a very polarizing figure, with some finding him to be a unique genius and others feeling he's a hack. I can't deny that he is a talented guy in the visuals department, as his films always look great, and you also have to admire his determination to make this type of movie for only $500,000 (if that, according to some sources), to write and direct it in the very unusual manner in which he did, literally taking it on the road, and also acting both as cinematographer and visual effects artist, the latter of which he'd done before on television shows, movies, and documentaries. When it comes to telling a well-paced story with interesting characters, however, Edwards is more than a little weak and seems determined to screw with people's expectations in a way that's kind of annoying, particularly in Godzilla, where he continually cuts away from the monster action to focus on people you don't care about. As a story, Monsters works better than Godzilla because of how unique it is and how there are no lofty expectations that come with it, since it's something Edwards himself conceived, but it still has some of those same problems. I do, however, think Edwards improved substantially with Rogue One, as that story and the majority of those characters kept me interested throughout and I really enjoyed the climactic battle, making it his best film in my eyes (although, I've since learned that movie was pretty extensively reshot, making me wonder how much of it I can credit to him).

Edwards has said his biggest goal was to have a film where really good special effects punctuated an already engaging story, one with characters you genuinely care about, but for me, even though I like them more now than I did, the two lead characters aren't the most memorable parts of the movie. That's not for the typical reasons like bad acting, lack of development, or the characters just being plain unlikable, as none of them apply. In fact, I'm not sure what it is other than both of them just feel kind of... there. You certainly get to know them over the course of the movie, and they're definitely not unlikable, even though they have their faults, but nothing about them really grabs me. Again, I can't say it's a case of bad acting, as neither of them are awful, but at the same time, they're not awe-inspiring. Edwards wanted the two of them to feel as real as possible, right down to the fact that he hired a real-life couple (Scoot McNairy and Whitney Able) and, rather than write dialogue for them, gave them only key plot-points to work with and an idea of what needed to be conveyed in a given scene so their interactions would feel more genuine, but sometimes, real just isn't interesting and I think that's the issue here. Maybe they are acting and reacting the way people would if this were truly happening and, while that can work, here it feels like the end result is your following around two people who don't have much personality to them. I didn't spend the movie wishing they would die but, at the same time, their developing relationship and the ultimate revelation of the meaning of the film's random opening concerning them didn't have much of an impact on me.

Both of the actors do have a lot to work with. McNairy portrays Andrew Kaulder as a rather jaded photojournalist who's in Mexico in order to photograph the creatures and the havoc they cause, particularly keen on getting a shot of a live one, which pays a lot of money, and is none too happy when he has to act as a chaperone for Samantha and get her back to the United States. He's especially irked over being threatened with losing his job if he doesn't do it and is quite impatient with Samantha at first, although he slowly grows to like her as the story progresses. After she misses the ferry when he discovers too late that the woman he spent the night with stole their passports, Kaulder, at first, tries to get another ticket just for her, but when it's made clear she'll have to go through the Infected Zone in order to reach America, having to sell her engagement ring to pay for passage, he decides to go with her. As they travel, Samantha, and the audience, learns several things about Kaulder. When she asks him if it bothers him that, in order for him to benefit, something bad has to happen to someone, his initial response is, "You mean, like a doctor?" and then clarifies that pictures of death and destruction get more money from his boss, and her father, than anything happy. He says he doesn't cause the grief, he just documents it, hinting that it's not a job he's completely satisfied with but, of course, he has to make a living, even if he has to take pictures when they're in potential danger. More significantly, she learns that Kaulder has a kid from a past relationship, one he's allowed to talk to and visit, but not divulge the truth concerning his parentage, as his mother's now married. As much as it hurts him, Kaulder goes along with it so as not to cause the kid any confusion and he's clearly the one thing he cares about, as he tries to call him whenever he gets a chance, especially since he's not going to make it home in time for his birthday. The scene at the end where Kaulder finally gets to talk to his son over the phone and begins to cry, both from missing his birthday and not being able to tell him the truth, is the one point where I think the acting goes from just being good to quite affecting, although it still doesn't have too much of an impact on me.

Whitney Able, whom I've since learned went to the same high school as myself, also plays Samantha "Sam" Wynden with a lot of baggage, although the details are left ambiguous. You never learn why she was in Mexico at the time of the monster attack (Kaulder asks her but never gets an answer) and while you do learn she has an engagement she doesn't seem too thrilled about, you never learn why or if it had anything to do with her being in the wrong place at the wrong time. She never lets on that her fiancé is a bad guy or abusive or only interested in her because she comes from a wealthy family, and, in fact, when she calls him after they reach the abandoned gas station upon crossing the border, her responses to his questions hint at a caring guy who even offered to come by and get her, so you can only guess as to why she feels the way she does. I personally think it has something to do with her father, whom she calls before they board the train at the beginning of the movie, as, judging from his voice, he comes across as a bit overbearing and patronizing, particularly when he demands to speak to Kaulder even though she tries to make him understand they need to board the train. I'd bet money he's probably pushing her into this marriage. One thing that is clear about Sam is she's much more sensitive to the death and suffering they see than Kaulder is and often shows a lot sympathy for those affected, especially children. And, like Kaulder, by the time the two of them finally make it through the Infected Zone and reach the border, she's a much different person than she was when the journey started and doesn't want to leave him and go home, although they're forced to when the military picks them up. Their ultimate fates are left ambiguous, as you don't know if they were killed in the ambush and resulting battle seen at the beginning or managed to escape the blast of the missile fired at the creature that attacked them.

Aside from the two leads, all of the other characters in the film are real people rather than actors and ended up on camera simply because they happened to be there when Gareth Edwards and company arrived (the armed men who escort Kaulder and Sam through the interiors of the Infected Zone were actually the filmmakers' personal bodyguards). As a result, and because they're onscreen so briefly, there's not much point in talking about all of them, save for one exception: the ferry ticket seller (Mario Zuniga Benavides). This guy was working in the diner at the spot where Edwards decided to shoot and turned out to be one of the best actors in the film, as he plays the character as a real fast-talker who drives a hard bargain and doesn't feel all that trustworthy given the ridiculous price he asks for a ticket. And the next day, he's not exactly sympathetic to Kaulder and Sam's problem, telling Kaulder a couple of times, "It's not my problem," and that he'll need twice the amount money to arrange such a dangerous trip through the Infected Zone, which is why Sam is forced to give up her engagement ring.

What I find most interesting about Monsters is the very guerilla style way in which it was filmed, which is so unheard for this type of movie in today's age. Basically, working from just an outline, all Gareth Edwards and his crew did was drive around Central America and if they found people and places they thought would fit well into the story, they shot it, often without any official permission. Filming at real locations without permission is not unheard of, but it's the idea of a movie that features a number of special effects being shot almost entirely on the fly that really blows my mind. It was also shot entirely on digital cameras rather than 35mm and even edited on a laptop, making it feel more like a very good-looking student film than something meant to be shown in theaters. And that's something else: despite the tiny budget and guerilla-style shooting, the movie looks pretty damn good. It has a much grittier feel to it than Edwards' later, infinitely more big-budget movies, but this is no slouch in the visual department either, thanks to the digital cameras and the amazing locations. I've always loved the way Central America looks, with all of the rainforests and rivers, and this film makes them look both mysterious and beautiful, especially in the moments shot at dusk. Ironically, the sequences in the Infected Zone look more appealing than those shot in the actual towns and cities of Mexico, which look grimy, sleazy, and dirty, as is sadly the case in reality. Take the motel Kaulder and Sam stay in on the second night, for instance. It really looks like one of those places you'd want to avoid staying in unless you had no choice at all. But what's most affecting is the memorial they come across for the people who've been killed by the monsters and the bombings, which was a real thing they filmed and later tweaked with effects to make it serve the story. That's about as real as you can get.

In wanting to create the "most realistic monster movie ever" and make it as far removed from a Hollywood blockbuster as he could, Edwards said that one of his goals was to create a world where the existence of monsters has become an accepted part of life that people don't really pay attention to anymore. His analogy was, "If Cloverfield was 9/11, then our movie is the War on Terror." Six years after the alien creatures first started popping up, their existence has now become an accepted

part of the world and life is simply going on as it was before they first appeared, just as it did in real life after the shock of the terrorist attacks slowly went away. For Edwards, the scene that best quantified this is when Kaulder and Sam arrive at the motel, turn on the TV in Sam's room to news footage of the military battling one of the monsters, and they don't even pay attention to it because they've seen it all before, instead engaging in simple small-talk. You also see old billboards

portraying the monsters, maps showing the reach of the Infected Zone, and an animated public service announcement showing kids what to do in case of an attack, showing how much this situation has become a part of everyday life, and the same goes for the sight of dead monsters lying atop the ruins of demolished buildings. The film also addresses how the people of southern Mexico can continue to live there with the ever-present threat of monster attacks, exemplified by a moment early on when Sam asks a taxi driver why they don't just

move away and he answers, "Where would we go? My work, my family is all here. This happens every year. We just take our chances." Edwards likened it to hurricanes and how people who don't move away because of the threat they pose; they just go about their daily lives until, during certain times of the year, they have to prepare to batten down the hatches, which is the case here with the monsters' yearly migrations. Definitely an interesting concept for a monster movie, one that lives up to the tagline, "Now, it's our turn to adapt."

In another attempt to make the movie as atypical as possible, Edwards decided to not only keep the monsters themselves off-camera for most of the film but also to stray away from the characters getting caught up in the ongoing battles with them except for a few notable moments. He said to imagine that the real action is going on over the nearby ridge, while the characters you're following would obviously want to do everything to avoid it and instead go around, only blundering into it those few times when they're forced to go through the Infected Zone. The best examples of this idea are when they hear the monsters' wail in the distance a couple of times during their journey but manage to slip away before anything happens. The first time I watched Monsters, those moments really annoyed me and I felt like I was being repeatedly teased with no payoff, but now that I understand what Edwards was going for, I can appreciate the idea of the characters arriving at a scene of carnage and destruction either too soon or, more often, too late. He's also said that he finds the aftermath of a disaster more affecting than seeing it happen, which is why you have so many sequences of cities and towns that have gone through complete hell, with dead monsters lying here and there, most notably with the town they find upon crossing the border that looks as if it's been bombed (which it might have been, considering how the movie starts). In retrospect, I do find that to be an interesting direction to go with in a monster movie... I just wish he hadn't continued with it when he made Godzilla, where I do find it to be an annoying tease, but that's a story for another day.

Maybe it's just me but, when I first saw the movie, I thought the designs of the creatures were just kind of "eh." They certainly look good, thanks to the special effects courtesy of Edwards himself, but to me, it feels like ever since Cloverfield, giant monsters have been continuously conceived as insect-like in some way, often with long, spindly legs, with other examples being the creature in Super 8 or even the MUTOs in Godzilla later on. Like everything else, upon repeated viewings, they've grown on me, as I think they are interesting-looking creatures, feeling like a combination of several different types of animals. Their heads are shaped like that of an octopus, their tentacles are akin to those of a squid, and they have long legs like spiders, as well as bio-luminescence akin to deep-sea creatures, which makes them look surprisingly beautiful during the final scene at the gas station. They also appear to be attracted to lights or anything electrical, as seen when the one creature sticks its tentacles into the gas station and approaches the TV inside. Like the Aliens, you also get a sense of their biology and life-cycles, learning that the name, "Infected Zone," refers to how they lay their eggs in the trees (there's a shot suggesting they either develop inside mushrooms on the sides of the trees or the eggs themselves simply look like mushrooms) and, once they hatch, they make their way into the rivers and ocean, where they grow. The destruction they cause tend to be due to their yearly migrations, which take them through populated areas, and while they're definitely very aggressive and willing and able to defend themselves if threatened, one of Kaulder and Sam's guides through the Infected Zone says if you don't bother them, they won't hurt you, and it's often the military's bombing of them that leads to the attacks.

Like a lot of monster movies, this film tries to make the case that the titular creatures aren't really bloodthirsty, evil demons but just animals doing what they do. You do see how frightening and dangerous they are, with the death and destruction they cause and the creepy ways they're initially filmed, such as in the night-vision shots of the military battling them that open the movie and appear on the news, or Kaulder and Sam's viewpoint during a scene in a van when one of the creatures kills their guides and everyone else, which is followed up by Kaulder finding their mangled bodies the next morning (we don't get a good look but Kaulder's expressions and what little we do see are enough). Also, the implications at the end, that they've managed to make it across the border and into the U.S., are unsettling, punctuated by the devastated town Kaulder and Sam come across. But, just when you think these things truly are nothing more than monsters, you have the final scene, where two of them come together right behind the gas station and gently mate. There's a reason why this scene is talked about so often, as it's definitely the best one in the whole film. It would actually make for an amazing short for its atmospheric beauty, as everything from the effects, the location, the creatures' bioluminescent glowing, the sounds they make, the lightning flashing in the distance, and the music is all just perfect. I also like when the creatures finish and go their separate ways and you can still see them glowing in the dark as they move off into the distance. For me, that one simple scene got across the idea that these things are just animals at the end of the day and that there is a gentleness and beauty to them, in spite of the havoc they cause. Their vocalizations, which are usually loud, unearthly wails and roars, come as very sweet and even loving when these two emit mating calls to each other (something else these creatures share with the male and female MUTOs in Edwards' Godzilla). Ultimately, which party are the "monsters" the title refers to is left ambiguous, as this is not a film that paints mankind as a killer of nature, despite the gun-ho nature of the soldiers who pick up Kaulder and Sam, but rather, as trying to defend itself, while also showing that the creatures are not evil (in fact, their presence is shown to have made the Infected Zone a rather lush, healthy ecosystem). There are no heroes and villains here; just two species trying to survive.

Another thing that astonishes me about Gareth Edwards is the notion that he created all of the digital effects himself, in his apartment, on his home computer, and it's even more mind-blowing that they turned out good as they did. The obvious things to point to are the creatures which, even though you know they are CGI, look just as good as any digitally-created monsters you'd see in a mega-budget, Hollywood blockbuster (Edwards spent a long time on them and it shows). Even more astonishing are the visual effects that are so good, you don't even know they are effects, which is everything that wasn't there on location, be they tanks, fighter jets, crashed vehicles, the big wall separating Mexico from the U.S., and all of the signs and text that correlate to the film's story. They're right in front of you, often not too far away from the camera, but they're because so well-done and are things you see in everyday life, you would never guess they were created inside of a computer, and that is where Edwards' talents lie. I really wish I could do the stuff he does on the laptop I'm using to type this! I know he used everyday effects software that you could buy in a store and he credits it to the advancements of digital technology since the 2000's, but there is something to how he himself used it, because I rarely see it used as effectively as this.

Given the main backdrop of the story and the plot of Kaulder and Samantha having to pay for passage to the border, meeting up with Mexican families desperate to make it over there too along the way, inevitably somebody is going to point to the film as being a commentary on the Mexico-America border situation, but Edwards has always insisted that was the furthest thing from his mind when he came up with the story. I'm not one of those people who tries to see things in films and TV that aren't

there, especially political statements, so I can buy the idea that the parallel was just a big coincidence and Edwards simply decided to set the story in an exotic location like Mexico (if he really did have a political agenda in mind, he apparently was much more subtle about it than I hear Robert Rodriguez was in Machete, which came out the same year). But, it is interesting to note the feeling of oppression that's befallen the Mexican people, not just from the monsters but also from the military

airstrikes against them, given those animated public service announcements about what to do in case of such a scenario, the ready availability of gas masks, and some anti-bombing graffiti seen here and there. I've also heard some people interpret the notion of the characters' eagerness to make it out, in particular Kaulder's line to Samantha early on that she'll soon be back home and will be able to forget about it all, as being an implication that what's going on in Mexico happens to people who live somewhere "other than America," and there could be something to that. What's more, their being surprised when they learn of the chemical weapons used against the monsters, a well-known and constant threat locally, could be seen as a subtle hint that most people in America are unaware of what's really going on down south and that the American government is determined to keep it Mexico's problem. Again, I'm not say that's absolutely what the movie is trying to say; I'm only saying you could see that if you wished to, and since Edwards is one of those filmmakers who feels it's best to leave some things up to the audience, why not?

One other aspect of Monsters that I have no problems with at all is the sparingly-used music score by Jon Hopkins, a very subtle, airy work that fits well with the low-key, quiet nature of the film. My favorite is the main theme, which you hear in full over the ending credits: a very beautiful, emotional piece that never becomes too loud or overbearing and, as I feel all pieces played over ending credits should, leaves you reflecting on what you've just seen. After the sweeping beginning, it segues into a very soft, sad-sounding piano piece, accompanied by ethereal background sounds, that becomes very, very quiet near the end, finishing on an eerie, humming sort of sound. Iterations of the two halves of this main theme are heard throughout the film, notable examples being a more synthesized, plucking version of the first half when they see the candle-filled memorials and the use of the latter half when they're talking around the campfire. Most of the rest of the music is done in this same subtle, emotional manner. You have a very otherworldly, wondrous bit that plays when Kaulder and Sam are shown the spores in the trees and a mysterious piece that has a sort-of vocalizing that leads into a softly reverberating sound when they come across the old temple that's been overtaken by the rainforest near the end. The only pieces of music that are frightening and suspenseful is a threatening one you hear when the convoy Kaulder and Sam end up in is attacked by a monster, and when the one appears over the gas station that Sam is in at the end and sticks its tentacles inside, and even that leads into a very pretty, haunting piece when the other creature appears and the two of them mate.

Monsters is definitely an interesting film and one that has grown on me over time, although I don't think it's completely flawless. It does have a lot going for it, such as well-done cinematography and good use of locations for such a low-budget, very impressive visual and creature effects which are even more astounding when you know they were all done by the director in his apartment, a unique way of presenting the monsters themselves and the world in which exist, and a beautiful, ethereal music score. Also the guerilla, on-the-fly way in which it was conceived and shot is definitely unique and to be admired, given how well it turned out. Unfortunately, it fails in delivering on Gareth Edwards' biggest hope, which is two lead characters I really, truly care about. Again, I don't hate them at all, and they're certainly not bad actors, but, at the same time, they feel very unremarkable and just a means to move the plot along. And while his goal to create the most realistic monster movie was an interesting one, I feel certain aspects of this film prove that "real" isn't always entertaining. In recommending the movie, I do so to people who know that what they're getting is not a movie where you'll see monsters smashing things and ripping people apart left and right but, rather, a subdued, dramatic road movie with a science fiction backdrop. If you're up for that, then I'd say check it out, because it does have a lot to recommend it; otherwise, you may want to steer clear, as it could easily come across as boring.