Home > Blogs > Sir Critic on Cinema > Archives > 2009 > March > 27 > Entry
‘Monsters vs. Aliens’ frenzied but fun
While I watched Monsters vs. Aliens, I thought it was visually dazzling, fast, funny and even delightfully clever.
So why can’t I remember much about it only a few days after seeing it?
I had a lot of fun in the theater, but after it was over, I felt like I had been zapped by a very slow-working version of the memory eraser from Men in Black. I remember certain scenes, characters and jokes well, but as a whole, the movie has faded from view, like the Invisible Man.
My usual beef with DreamWorks’ animated movies is that they emphasize gags over character and story, which is what happened with lesser entries like the Madagascar films and Bee Movie. Occasionally, DreamWorks overcomes that and produces a winner like Over the Hedge or Kung Fu Panda.
Monsters vs. Aliens falls somewhere in between those extremes. It’s good, solid fun that would have been even better had the filmmakers not overstuffed the movie. The central character is Susan (Reese Witherspoon) who gets struck by a meteorite on her wedding day. At the altar, she finds herself growing and growing (with newly white hair) until she’s just shy of 50 feet tall. Before she can say “Fee, fi, fo fum,” the military is tying her down and whisking her away to a top-secret facility.
Turns out the military has been capturing monsters for years. Other guests at the facility include the mad genius Dr. Cockroach (Hugh Laurie), the amphibianesque Missing Link (Will Arnett), the smart-aleck B.O.B (Seth Rogen), who resembles one of the Pac-Men monsters, and the massive Insectosaurus, who’s even bigger than Susan, now stuck with the ungainly name Ginormica.
The government has been storing the creatures away for military purposes, and wouldn’t you know it, a threat arrives in the form of Gallaxhar (Rainn Wilson), a dastardly alien who wants the power source that turned Susan into a giant.
That’s an awful lot of plot, and that’s the main problem with Monsters vs. Aliens. It tries too hard.
To its credit, the movie does have more heart than some DreamWorks films. However, the story piles on so many characters, sidekicks, subplots, and razzle-dazzle effects, it creates sensory overload. It felt good at the time, but I came crashing down from the rush.
Kung Fu Panda juggled a lot of supporting players too, but it never lost sight of its central character, and Monsters vs. Aliens does, to a certain extent. Susan makes a good heroine, but all the sidekicks and action scenes keep getting in her way. It doesn’t help that Gallaxhar is a dull villain who never seems all that threatening.
As for the much-ballyhooed 3D effects, they’re well done, but I wouldn’t say the 3D is essential to the viewing experience the way it was for The Polar Express. The main action scene in San Francisco, however, is a blast that justifies the glasses (and the higher price).
Monsters vs. Aliens gets the job done and is an enjoyable ride, but I can’t escape the feeling that all that razzmatazz trapped a great movie inside this good movie that I began to forget right away.
GRADE: B
Permalink | Comments (4) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
Comments
By Allie D.
March 31, 2009 1:01 PM | Link to this
I agree, Eric. I also want to express that there is nothing wrong with having similar standards for animated films as we do of live-action ones. Movies like Wall-E and Finding Nemo have shown the animation medium can be just as gratifying on a deeper emotional level as they can on a superficial, eye-candy one. Obviously the film fulfilled Eric’s expectation to be entertained, but that isn’t the only basis by which he (or anyone) should have to judge a film. And having such standards doesn’t mean someone doesn’t have a life. For crying out loud, when will people stop using the “get a life” argument?By Sir Critic
March 31, 2009 12:02 PM | Link to this
Brandon: I actually agree with you that the movie delivered. I gave it a B, which means I thought it was good, but not great. I didn’t expect the movie to “change my life.” I don’t expect ANY movie to change my life. But I had high hopes for this film because I thought the premise was fun, the trailers were entertaining, and I love the genre the movie is spoofing. Unfortunately, the movie let me down somewhat, even though I liked it, and I tried to reflect that in this review. This film is fun, but it could have been even better - maybe it even should have been better. And I have no qualms about wanting some movies to be better than merely entertaining.By Brandon
March 31, 2009 11:09 AM | Link to this
I went to see the movie on Friday, and I have to say I enjoyed it. I did not go in thinking that I was seeing a movie that I would remember weeks to come. I went in knowing I was seeing a 3D cartoon. It got me away from reality for a while and made me laugh a few times along the way. Thats all I was looking for. I am amazed people went into this movie thinking it would be moving. A 3D cartoon movie should have one goal for any self respecting adult, entertainment. This movie does that. It was not a waste of money and it kept my attention the whole time I was there. Anyone that thinks a cartoon movie is going to somehow change their life needs to get one.By Allie D.
March 27, 2009 12:25 PM | Link to this
You described perfectly why Dreamworks struggles to capture the hearts of viewers. I really hoped they were getting somewhere with Kung-Fu Panda, which I thought was a very touching story, but it also had a very lovable lead character. This looks like a brilliantly made movie, but it’s sad that it fades so fast from the memory. I felt the same way about Madagascar and the Shrek sequels.