web counter
 

Face The Thing That Should Not Be

By TK | Posted Under Trailers | Comments (8)

500x_monsters.jpg

I’m a little nervous about overhyping Monsters, the tiny-budget flick from writer/director Gareth Edwards. It looks great, it’s been getting excellent reviews on the film festival circuit, and it’s apparently in the vein of District 9 — that is to say, a low-budget foreign flick about aliens, but that also serves as an allegorical tale for deeper social issues. But the trailers have been playing up, well, the monster aspect of it quite a bit, and from what I understand, there ain’t all that much monsterin’. Instead, much of it is implied, with only a few money shots of the monsters themselves.

Regardless, it looks like an interesting project.

The newest teaser trailer is on Apple and isn’t embeddable yet (stupid Apple! Be less restrictive!). It’s a combination of some parts of the earlier trailer, as well as some of the footage that was shown in an earlier clip. There isn’t a ton of new stuff to see, but what I like about the project is the emphasis on how the country is affected by the arrival of the creatures — not so much the creatures themselves, but the actual human impact. That’s a refreshing dose of actual drama, showing how humanity deals with… and lives with the crisis.

So click the link and watch it, you bums.

Then kneel before your new tentacled masters.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance

← Book Review: "Cleopatra and Antony: Power, Love and Politics in the Ancient World" by Diana Preston | I Am Woman, Hear Me ____ | "Mad Men"(S4/E4), "The Rejected" →









Comments

Cannotwaitquiteexcitedneedmorecoffee.

Posted by: Cindy at August 17, 2010 9:12 AM

If it ever comes up, I'll volunteer and have sex with the monsters if they ask for a volunteer to impregnate one of them. Now you're probably asking yourself, "Why would Kballs do such a thing?" Because it can never be topped.

"Oh, you banged three women at once? Guess what? Remember that crazy invasion a few months back? Yeah? I boned one of them. Hard."

"Wow, bagged a supermodel last weekend, huh? Well check this out: Not only did I fuck a monster, that thing WANTED me to fuck it!"

"Geez, you're telling me you had sex with the First Lady and a cloned version of Cleopatra while a trained tiger licked your balls? Not bad. But hey! Yeah, come on in here. Come on, lean in so you can hear this. Are you listening? . . . . I'm having a monster baby. OOOOOOHHHHHH!!!!" *shoves his face* "Fuck YOUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Posted by: Kballs at August 17, 2010 9:25 AM

I think Kballs just made a strong push for EE clubhouse leader.

And I can't wait for this movie. Even knowing there isn't a whole lotta monsterin' going on doesn't detract from it for me.

Posted by: Fredo at August 17, 2010 9:32 AM

I fear this could go down the same road as Cloverfield in that the best parts of the movie are the ones without the monster(s) in it.

Our own imaginations are far better at coming up with horrors when it is merely suggested that there is something big and scary out of frame rather than showing it outright. After that our perception of the movie is limited by what we know about said monster rather than the infinite possibilities behind the unknown.

We want to see a claw leaving frame, hear an unearthly growl, see the destruction left in its wake. The best part of it is the suspense in the "What the Hell is it?!?" the audience is forced to ask. But I have to warn you, the payoff had better be worth it. The creature needs to be worthy of both our fears and suspense and the terror the characters are expressing onscreen. Otherwise the publicity campaign for this movie will only add to the audience's collective ire if it turns out to be anti-climactic.

Despite the havoc it inflicted I found the Cloverfield monster to be laughable. The build-up was too much, and the payoff negligible. I would like to think the Monsters could swing for the fences and give us something that even just for a moment might convince us that something really is out there...

Posted by: bleujayone at August 17, 2010 9:48 AM

Despite the havoc it inflicted I found the Cloverfield monster to be laughable. The build-up was too much, and the payoff negligible.

I agree. The climax was pretty damn ridiculous.

The human moments, though... I know a lot of people didn't like those characters very much, but the scene where the one character is calling their mother to tell him his brother didn't make it out, or the scene where the guy holding the camera actually has a human connection with the girl he's spent the movie mooning over... yeah, that was pretty good.

Posted by: twig at August 17, 2010 10:05 AM

I love monster movies where you don't see the monsters for a very long time. They're smart, and the monsters are usually rather disappointing. Cloverfield is a perfect example like the comments above said. The Descent was another one like that-- the monsters themselves were a bit of a letdown and everything was much scarier before we got a good look at them. They were still scary, but it was the buildup that made that movie so good.

This looks awesome. Can't wait!

Posted by: figgy at August 17, 2010 12:51 PM

Add Signs to the list of movie monsters that were better implied than seen.

Then cut off the last 20-30 minutes, burn it, and bury it in a ditch.

Posted by: Neodiogenes at August 17, 2010 3:38 PM

I love monster movies where you don't see the monsters for a very long time.

Posted by: figgy at August 17, 2010 12:51 PM

That's what made the original Alien by Ridley Scott one of my favorite movies ever. And the monster did NOT disappoint.

Posted by: Uriah Creep at August 17, 2010 9:33 PM