Monsters vs. Aliens
posted March 23, 2009 10:46 AM
So these monsters and this alien walk into a bar … and the outcome is just as predictable as you'd expect.
DreamWorks has staked a lot on writer-directors Conrad Vernon and Rob Letterman's 3D cartoon—too bad they didn't invest much in the script, which never fails to hit the most obvious comic notes. (At least the 8-year-olds in the audience were rolling.) Pic could recoup most of its costs with heavy marketing and technological novelties, but by the DVD release—and definitely by next year—audiences will demand more effort than everyone at DreamWorks (excluding the animators) seems willing to exert.
Reese Witherspoon voices Susan, a.k.a. Ginormica, a mealy bride with Witherspoon's button nose and none of her spark. On her wedding day to grasping small time news anchor Derek (Paul Rudd), Susan is hit by a meteorite with a powerful element that turns her hair white and her dress size to a XL40. Within minutes, she's nabbed by a government goon squad and taken to a secret facility that overseer Gen W.R. Monger (Kiefer Sutherland) describes as an "X-File wrapped in a cover up, deep fried in a paranoid conspiracy." Her fellow inmates, Dr. Cockroach PhD (Hugh Laurie), B.O.B. (Seth Rogan) and The Missing Link (Will Arnett), attempt to comfort her in her new life behind bars, as does a massive, furry larva that chirps like Chewbacca and possibly exists just to exact revenge on Pixar for adorablizing a cochroach. Meanwhile, the evil alien Gallaxhar (Rainn Wilson)—a beast with four-eyes, squid legs and hands on the end of each leg—is on an intergalactic hunt for the element packed into Susan's cell matter.
What happens next? Do you really need to ask? Lampooning B movies is tricky business—they're funny enough played straight. Tim Burton's subversive Mars Attacks knew the American Dream was its real target, but Vernon and Letterman stay strictly pop culture superficial. They'll do anything for a laugh (or even a slight smile) including wedging a Dance Dance Revolution gag into the climactic battle; the film's commitment to its premise is about as sincere as Anna Nicole Smith's marriage to her billionaire. (And its references as dated as my lame analogy.)
Still, though the film runs itself into a wall, attention must be paid to the well-cast voice actors. Witherspoon, regrettably, has little to do but squeal—her Susan is written whiny and average, a small personality who would admit she's more likely to be found working to serve up an Orange Julius than to save the planet. When she finally finds her inner badass we're thrilled along with her, especially if it means she'll stop saying her fiancé’s name every third word. Her cohorts, Laurie and Arnett, do solid work with the lines they've got, as does Sutherland's gruff military man and Wilson's slithering villain, but the star here is Rogen, cast concurrent with type as a lovable dolt with motives as clear as his gelatinous body. A genetically engineered tomato crossed with ranch flavoring, he's got no brain, but no matter—his ladylove is a Jell-O salad. Rogen is the best thing in the flick—he's even the best-looking thing. The closest this movie gets to transcendence is letting light and reflection splay across his shiny skin, all in mesmerizing, rippling 3D. By contrast, a close up of General Monger's cheek, ravaged by pores and stubble, left me in awe of the capacities of the DreamWorks' animators. The action sequences aren't shabby either, but the delight is in the details: the way specks of dust fly up when Ginormica thuds to the ground. If they can fix their females—all of whom sag in the middle like pencils with birthing hips—and, you know, write an actual movie, DreamWorks' team could pack a punch more powerful than a dozen atomic avengers.
Distributor: Paramount
Cast: Reese Witherspoon, Hugh Laurie, Will Arnett, Seth Rogen, Rainn Wilson, Stephen Colbert, Kiefer Sutherland and Paul Rudd
Directors/Screenwriters: Conrad Vernon, Rob Letterman
Producer: Lisa Stewart
Genre: Family/Adventure
Rating: Rated PG for sci-fi action, some crude humor and mild language.
Running time: 94 min
Release date: March 27, 2009
19 Comments
Leave a comment
Anonymous said:
first
March 23, 2009 1:48 PM
JaysQ said:
Oh man this thing is just absolutely stunning. Visually it is just out of this world. Some of the best 3-D I've seen and that's saying alot given all the great 3-D films that have come out recently or are on the way in the near future. Don't get me wrong there's some awesome voice work as well, and some gut busting moments of hilarity. Kid or adult your going to be entertained by Monsters vs. Aliens.
http://fandom-film-review.blogspot.com
March 24, 2009 12:30 AM
Martin said:
Yo dont have an idea how difficult is to make an animation movie.... i hate when critics say stupid things
March 24, 2009 5:34 AM
blkbandit said:
it is difficult making an animated film but when morons and sycophants are in charge this is the result you get.
March 24, 2009 9:44 AM
Kevin Johnson said:
He didn't complain about the animation, he complained about the script.
March 24, 2009 12:19 PM
Mark said:
Isn't Reese Witherspoon's character name Ginormica, not Gigantica? That's what it says on IMDB. Did you proof read your article before it was published? That's kind of a big thing to mess up.
March 25, 2009 8:16 AM
BOXOFFICE Staff said:
Mark: Corrected.
March 25, 2009 8:28 AM
unimportant said:
newsflash: pores and stubble on someones cheek have nothing to with the animators. If your going to bash and/or praise a department at least give them the respect of actually knowing what they do.
Oh, and just to clear it up for you:
Pours and stubble--art department and surfacing
Specks of dust flying up when Ginormica thuds to the ground--FX
Character acting, movement, emotion, timing-- ANIMATION.
March 25, 2009 11:33 AM
MrPeepers said:
to unimportant: I always judge case by case, so in your case, if there were a case lower than lowercase, that would be the case that I would use to type your name. Case closed, just in case.
March 25, 2009 7:56 PM
tinky said:
hate the fact that they're charging extra for 3D
March 28, 2009 10:37 PM
Impressed and Unimpressed said:
IMPRESSED: by this film. This is definitely a must-see, and although I was VERY resistant to the hype around the 3D and how this is going to "change the way movies are experienced", after seeing it, I agree. This movie isn't as perfect from a story standpoint as, say, The Incredibles. But it's a solid (if predictable) story that's a lot more fun than this review gives it credit for.
UNIMPRESSED: by this review. I think critics sometimes feel like they're not doing their job if they berate a film or find derisive comments to make about a project. MONSTERS VS. ALIENS is an exceptional quality animation, all the more exceptional in 3D. And you can see extraordinary attention to detail in every frame. (And yes, that includes the screenplay. You might think you're so far above it, but watch it closely. This is a well-conceived story that's tight and distinctly on course. It knows its audience -- it's PG after all -- and it plays to it beautifully. Throw in a few mature audience references, like the one to CLOSE ENCOUNTERS, and you've got a film that deserves at least a star and a half more than this dud reviewer gives it.)
CONCLUSION: Go see this film on a big screen wearing the funny glasses. Guaranteed a good time.
March 29, 2009 4:53 PM
muhsatdi said:
its completed animation
March 30, 2009 8:43 AM
Anonymous said:
i wnt 2 no the film so i can watch it
April 2, 2009 1:01 PM
Heimdall said:
Having very much enjoyed Coraline in 3D not too long ago, I was interested in seeing this one with the plastic glasses on too, but an unfortunate scheduling development herded us into the 2D variation instead.
Even so, I very much enjoyed the animation, but Mr. Unimpressed is flat out wrong when he says the story is "well conceived" and "distinctly on course." I'm more of a mind with Ms. Nicholson, actually; a couple Seth Rogen lines and the DDR reference were about the only things I felt inclined to laugh (guiltily) at that weren't in the previews.
For a much better PG experience despite slightly older (but still immersing) animation techniques, watch Monsters, Inc instead.
Animation: 5/5
Comedy: 2.5/5
Story: 1.5/5
Seth Rogen:
April 3, 2009 4:44 PM
Anonymous said:
Hey Mark - did you proofread your post before you published it, or do you not know that proofread is one word. Gotcha!
April 3, 2009 11:55 PM
carissa said:
i love your movie
April 11, 2009 12:42 PM
carissa said:
i love your movie
April 11, 2009 12:43 PM
kate said:
the girl on the movie is devenetly not sexy sexy or hot hot.
April 17, 2009 8:40 AM
Final Cut Medic said:
To unimportant:
"Character acting, movement, emotion, timing-- ANIMATION."
Actually you're a little off base too. Timing does not come from animation. Timing comes from Editing. Editors time each shot in rough storyboards that the animators then follow. Sometimes animators lengthen a shot - but more often than not - they animated to the way an Editor cut the shot/scene.
And as for Character acting - also remember that the directors and editor also choose the "dialogue" takes that best fit the shot and/or scene. So some of the character's performance is pre-determined before the shot ever gets into the hands of an animator.
FCM
April 19, 2009 7:46 PM