Monsters vs Aliens Review - Another DreamWorks Blunder
by Alex Billington
March 28, 2009
I gave it a fair shot, I really did. I am a Pixar fanboy at heart, but I got that way because they've put out consistently incredible movies. DreamWorks Animation, on the other hand, has had only three movies that I've ever enjoyed - Shrek, Shrek 2, and Kung Fu Panda. They've consistently released what I consider to be completely dull, mindless, and un-entertaining animated crap, that is sadly eaten up by American audiences. Unfortunately, DreamWorks' latest feature, Monsters vs Aliens, is no different, despite my hopes and desires that they'd finally uncovered the secret to good movies last year with Kung Fu Panda.
Before it even began, I knew exactly how it would play out, it was just so obvious. We have some monsters: The Missing Link (Will Arnett), B.O.B. (Seth Rogen), Dr. Cockroach (Hugh Laurie), Insectosaurus, and the newest addition, an average woman struck by a meteor who turns into Ginormica (Reese Witherspoon). So when this alien robot first lands on Earth, they're brought in to attack it, but of course, even if they succeed, they've essentially failed. That's just natural, you have to screw up first to then figure out how to succeed later. Obviously this recycled story is about two things: this team of monsters learning about their strengths and weaknesses, and this team of monsters dealing with being outcasts until they finally save the world.
Monsters vs Aliens is all about the spectacle and nothing more. DreamWorks' head Jeffrey Katzenberg is all about the technology and money. He re-packages the same exact story in a different wrapper every year, with advancements not in story or characters, but in the technology. Monsters vs Aliens isn't an improvement over Shrek or Madagascar, it's the same thing, the same sight gags, the same unlaughable comedy, even the same characters in some instances. Add in a touch of 3D, some aliens and some monsters, and he can walk away with another $200 million in the bank. People don't like change, so why not show the same thing every year, just at higher prices (it cost me an extra $15 to see this in 3D my second time).
The first 30 minutes of this were truly excruciatingly painful to watch. I'm not sure how bad sight gags and poor character animation still gets through the system there at DreamWorks, but I'm certain I was watching the same bland comedy that they first came up with for Shrek eight years ago. Once you learn that five different screenwriters were credited on this (and who knows how many story editors weren't credited), it's apparent that they weren't doing much besides providing a broad idea of what happens, and letting the same writers who've been there for the last ten years add the same physical humor and painful dialogue.
To be fair, this wasn't a complete disaster, and there are actually some redeeming qualities. Of everything I could compliment, it was the 3D (remember that bit about Katzenberg only caring about technology?). I'm not normally a 3D guy, but this is one of those instances where I wouldn't see it any other way (and won't ever watch it on DVD for that very reason). Additionally, the voice work in this was excellent, especially from Seth Rogen in particular, as well as Will Arnett, Rainn Wilson as the villain Gallaxhar and Stephen Colbert as the President. But here's the problem - without 3D, what else does it got? Nothing.
Sure, a few of you (including me) might have gotten a kick out of watching some of those lavish action sequences that take place inside of Gallaxhar's alien ship in the latter half, but that doesn't make up for an otherwise lackluster story. And I'm here not to judge it solely on how visually exciting it was to watch, especially because I only chuckled a few times in the entire 94 minutes (mostly thanks to Seth Rogen). This is where I have to make that inevitable Pixar comparison. Pixar's movies not only have those entertaining action sequences, but they also have wonderful stories, built upon real emotions and true storytelling values. DreamWorks seems to instead devote all their energy to making it look good and work well in 3D.
I'm not going to say that Monsters vs Aliens was awful, as it had some enjoyable scenes and was a real step up from the likes of Shrek the Third and Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa. But truly, when I'm seeing the exact same story and the exact same comedy and the exact same characters I saw a few years ago from a movie I hated even more, I can't simply forgive its follies and give it a stamp of approval. Instead, I've got to point out its flaws, and suggest that unless you have a true desire to see this in 3D, to save your $15 and watch Kung Fu Panda (or any Pixar movie). Monsters vs Aliens is, sadly, yet another DreamWorks mishap.
Alex's Rating: 5 out of 10
I totally agree with you Alex, I was actually rather excited for this film, and was left utterly dissapointed, but this just all comes to prove that DeamWorks will never top DIsney/Pixar. Seth Rogan and the 3-D were the highlights of the film
Bo on Mar 28, 2009
We're all Pixar fanboys at heart, I can't think of one recent Computer Generated animated film that is even close to being as good as any of the Pixar films.
Timothy on Mar 28, 2009
I disagree. I took my family took this movie last night. The whole theater kept in laughter. The kids enjoyed it, the adults did too. Graphics were good right down to the styble on the Generals chin. We did not goto the digital 3-D we went to a regular showing (I am not a 3-D fan). The story was original and different from anything that has been thrown at up before. If you truely want a review thats honest, ask a kid see how they feel about it. They are the ones who these movies are made for.
Hawk on Mar 28, 2009
The kids did enjoy it, but for everyone else it was just bland and mostly flat. What a shame.
Itri on Mar 28, 2009
Hater.... hahhaa... headin out to see it in 30 minutes with the family.... will report back, but Hawk #3, thank you for making me feel a little easier about this decision. see you at ShoWest Alex.
Dusty on Mar 28, 2009
I agree with #3's sentence about who this movie is intended for. I did not see the movie but hes right, ask a kid who saw this movie what they thought of it.
big r on Mar 28, 2009
This review sounds jaded . But i guess most reviews are .
Superchyle on Mar 28, 2009
Ask a kid what they thought? Why would the general public want to read a kid's opinion of a movie? Just 15 years ago I would've said the Power Rangers movie was awesome and recommended it to anyone. Now, I know that it was pure cheese. So no, a kid's movie doesn't ONLY have to appeal to kids. As a matter of fact, I thought it was supposed to be a FAMILY movie.
Alfredo on Mar 28, 2009
I watched this movie last night at the 3d Showing.. I watched it for what it was.. I Kids movie that adults cant enjoy at the same time.. It was great seeing all the B movie ideas come to together to make this film.. If you want a serious film then go watch the crap the Oscars nominated and stop trashing films that are for kids.. Its no worse then the old Disney movies.. And they are quality movies..
David on Mar 28, 2009
Ask a kid about Hanana Montana.... must mean she's good
L on Mar 28, 2009
I just got back from seeing it and I'm agreeing entirely with everything you said. I laughed in earnest, only a few times, mostly at Seth Rogen (and I thought the Axel F music thing was funny although not wholly original as a joke), and the story was old and tired. Yes, the action bits at the end were fun and yes, the 3D was good (although the very beginning with the ball on a string coming out at you... can we please just put an embargo on stuff like that in 3D movies), but overall, not great. I must point out though, the cinema was packed with small kids and they seemed to enjoy it, so I guess it succeeded at being a good kids movie, but then Pixar does that was well and we still get a movie adults can enjoy as well.
Joshi on Mar 28, 2009
Kids movie!?! WTF!?! You have to taken your freakin' kids to the movie and companies know parents are sitting there bored or happy. They tried to make you happy and laugh so a kid's opinion is squat because if I ask a parent when I have kids how a movie was and they would rather die, then my kid can wait for bit torrent or netflix. Pixar's movies are awesome but I don't even like all of those but Dreamworks animated movie I enjoyed was Antz and that wasn't intended for kids. Whoever compared classic Disney movies to this is insane and it's just plain absurd. These movies will be forgotten, Aladdin, The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast will always be remembered. Heck, I'm collecting those now for my kids but I ain't wasting money on some of this crap now. Wall-e though I own! 😀
Hey Ya on Mar 28, 2009
I knew it. I just knew it was bad. ( maybe because Seth Rogen is doing a voice. He is poison!)
Tim "CLoverfield" on Mar 28, 2009
3D movies cost more now period, not just DreamWorks ones. I saw $15 tickets for Jonas Bros. too.
AG on Mar 28, 2009
5/10 is a little harsh. I saw it in 3-D last night and there were some good parts and laughs but i was bored a few times I'd say a more of a 6-6.5/10
Rad on Mar 28, 2009
This review wasn't written for kids.
Tom on Mar 28, 2009
hahahaha @ 10! so right.
Lacey on Mar 28, 2009
This comment is a follow-up to the twitter debate I had with Alex. I tried to make the point that MVA was just supposed to be a fun family flick/throwback to '50s/'60s, and that he should at least acknowledge when a movie accomplishes what it was trying to. He never responded to the latter point. He also never responded when I asked why Transformers was an acceptable form of entertainment, but MVA wasn't. (They're actually quite similar, no? Both are action-packed and visually spectacular. Both have giant things smashing stuff. Both include a bunch of lame comedic gags. etc.) When Alex went to see MVA for a second time, he wrote: "spending $15 to see this tonight... I'm gearing up for one hell of a slaughtering with my review oh man!" Hey, you know what's really easy to do when you watch a movie? Find flaws. Especially when you're specifically going into a movie with that attitude. Quote from the review: "Before it even began, I knew exactly how it would play out, it was just so obvious. ...even if they succeed, they've essentially failed. That's just natural, you have to screw up first to then figure out how to succeed later. Obviously this recycled story is about two things: this team...learning about their strengths and weaknesses, and this team...dealing with being outcasts until they finally save the world." In the same review that you praised Kung Fu Panda as one of Dreamworks successes, you dismissed Monsters vs. Aliens... for something that applies to both of them. And you know what else it applies to? The Incredibles. Do you consider the use of that formula to be a flaw in all three of these films, or just MVA? Even after that, you continue to deride the "recycled story" while never once acknowledging that the story isn't SUPPOSED to be original. The entire point is that it's taking elements of classic monster/alien movies from the '50s/'60s and throwing them together. I'm not trying to say I have anything against you disliking the film. Hell, I didn't even think the movie was that great, and I'd never recommend anybody see it in anything other than 3D. My problem though is that your critique isn't fair. The criteria you're holding against this film is inconsistent with the criteria you've held against other, similar films. On top of that, you're judging it for not achieving things that it wasn't even attempting to. And yet, despite all that, you actually insult the people who like the film: "...dull, mindless, and un-entertaining animated crap, that is sadly eaten up by American audiences." Harsh words, Alex. Hopefully you can do a better job backing them up next time.
Adam Quigley on Mar 28, 2009
Is it just me or is ANTZ the first and best film from Dreamworks Animation (formely PDI)
Boxoffice Marco on Mar 28, 2009
Adam Quigley, It's just an opinion. I am sure some of your opinions could be argued in the same exact way, but why put all the energy into doing that? Your counter-point, while acceptable, is all undermined by your obvious "pre-bias" against things that Alex writes. Much like his bias going into MVA, you had a bias going into his article. "Hey, you know what's really easy to do when you watch a movie? Find flaws. Especially when you're specifically going into a movie with that attitude." This is you vs. this article...
Sean Hunter on Mar 28, 2009
Nah, Shrek was the best. If you ask me. I saw bits in IMAX 3D today and man... what is it with 3d? It looks ok. Less painfull to watch. Less fucking me eyeballs. But the 3d effect is friggin minimal! 3D is overrated allready!
Rickmeister on Mar 28, 2009
What a poor attempt at a serious review from a Pixar-fanboy. Your tears amuse me.
Kekeke on Mar 28, 2009
"DreamWorks Animation, on the other hand, has had only three movies that I've ever enjoyed - Shrek" you mention shrek, as one of the ones you enjoyed, then you bash it later with "Monsters vs Aliens isn't an improvement over Shrek or Madagascar, it's the same thing, the same sight gags, the same unlaughable comedy, even the same characters in some instances." When I see a favorable and intelligent review from you, instead of being a hypocrite, then we will talk, but honestly. The movie is meant for kids, Dreamworks does animation movies for the money, some gags for aduls but mostly to get kids to go see the movie or beg their parents so they earn cash. Pixar does it so they can truly show the beauty and story telling behind an animation film. It's unfair to even put them in the same catagory.
Movieraider321 on Mar 28, 2009
"what else does it got?" case closed.
chris on Mar 28, 2009
Movie was dull and not funny at all. Seth Rogan and the 3D were the best thing going for it. Mind you I saw the movie at a free screening in IMAX 3D and the effects and animation were impessive. The movie sucked! My 11 yr old son thought it was bad and rarely laughed. This movie is catered for 3 yr olds! Disappointing to say the least and I am glad I didn't pay to see it!
dee on Mar 28, 2009
I saw this at the theater I work at while monitoring a sometimes-faulty projector up in the projection booth. I have to say, it was much better than I expected. I got a few out-loud laughs from it, and I thought it was generally good all-around. It's not trying to be a cinematic masterpiece - it's trying to be an entertaining family movie. I think it succeeded. Alex, I think you're just being biased because you love Pixar so much. I love Pixar, too, but I don't think that every animated movie is trying to be a Wall-E or Incredibles or Toy Story.
RC on Mar 28, 2009
well as I figured it would be.... couple coded jokes for the parents .. and slap stick randomness for the 9 yr old ... not a stellar movie, not worth the $9 ticket for Saturday 3D matinee, but was what I was expecting it would be, a good time at the movie with my family and those happen at some of the worst movies some times.
Dusty on Mar 28, 2009
Took my kids and wife to see this movie and we all enjoyed it. I guess like with anything everyone has their own opinions. Your right years ago I took my nephews to Power rangers and they loved it. They wouldn't watch it now to save their lives as they are 30 and 24 now. Point is they enjoyed it then, thats what movies are suposed to do entertain. Bet ya 15 years ago #8 was rolling their jeans and thought Coke Classic was rad. Wouldn't be dead doing that now. Times change so do opinions.
Ron on Mar 28, 2009
@ 18, Damn good point son
Fruity Loops on Mar 28, 2009
It wasn't the greatest, but it had its moments and it was a million times better than Cars.
AG on Mar 28, 2009
and so Pixar continue to rule with an Iron Fist. Bring on "Up".
Kal-el on Mar 28, 2009
Went with a friend and 4 kids tonight, The 3D was spectacular. Usually I ask my kids if they enjoyed the movie and they say it was "good". Tonight before even asking my one son said it was amazing. This was a great movie and there was applause after the movie. My friend and I laughed out loud at many parts. BOB steals the show. Highly recommended.
Dave on Mar 28, 2009
I haven't seen this, was looking forward to this (on Blu-Ray), but am here to say: THANK YOU. This review is brutally honest & what this site needs more of. Honest reviews of final products despite build-up and hype. Thank you for providing an honest review of a movie that couldve been very sugar-coated. All hail Pixar.
Voice of Reason on Mar 28, 2009
I haven't seen this movie yet. My issue is with what seems to be a strangely biased review. It sounds as though you went into the theater with a preconceived notion about it. You already knew you hated it and were pretty much going into the theater for the sole purpose of watching for the scenes which would confirm the reasons behind your dislike. Whatever happened to going into a movie with an open mind, prepared to give it a fair shake? It's different if you're just some guy telling his friends about a movie. But you've set yourself up as someone whose opinion about movies we're supposed to respect. How are we to do that if we can't trust that you're coming from a place of objectivity?
ebbie on Mar 28, 2009
cant believe how retarded all these comments are
Cody on Mar 29, 2009
Its very seldom that I agree with any of Alex' reviews but he got this one spot on, especially the"dull, mindless, and un-entertaining animated crap" part summarizes it pretty well. By the way I cant help but thinking some of the comments here are made by promotion reps.
Shige on Mar 29, 2009
Well, what makes PIXAR films different from DREAMWORKS is that Pixar films are not just for kids, i even think that Pixar's audience are equally divided among the demos. While Dreamworks are basically for kids, their films are saturated with visuals that would wow kids, but it ends there, just visuals. Unfortunately, for me, i see movie not by its looks but because of its story, something i get every time from a Pixar film. And 35, what are you saying that Pixar films are the same? Pixar films have exhibited almost all emotions and genre in film-making, the had action, romance, sci-fi, and even 'cooking', not to mention all has FAMILY VALUES. It is Dreamworks which has its films almost the same every time, almost all are TALKING ANIMALS.
fart on Mar 29, 2009
I agree with ya' Al. From the first moment I saw the first trailer(about 2 yrs ago or something) I knew it was going to flop.
Catz2 on Mar 29, 2009
Wait a sec. You didn't like Antz? That's gotta be Dreamwork's best animated movie. It's way better than Shrek and Shrek 2 (I haven't seen Kung Fu Panda). And honestly, I like it better than A Bug's Life too (they both came out at the same time. That's why I compared them).
Luke on Mar 29, 2009
Shrek 2 and Kung Fu Panda = classics. Everything else? Is just uncivilized. *puts on CB34's and applies Rightguard*
BinYe East on Mar 29, 2009
Ah, I totally disagree with some of the comments. I enjoyed the movie very much, some of the sequences are just hilarious and the animation is so darn good... I don't know why all the attacks. I guess pixar fans are not very objective... Wall-E wasn't that amazing y'know?
Leiner on Mar 29, 2009
@35 You're pretty much describing the typical Hollywood story arc - and if you replace your word "friendship" with "character development" which is essentially what "friendship" is - then you're describing ANY story arc... which means your point is kind of moot. "Why is it that Jaws, Star Wars, and Ghostbusters all have characters in them that have a problem and then solve them? SAME. MOVIES." No. Sure there's a lot of "friendship" going on rather than angry, bloody vengeance, but Pixar makes movies for kids; so having Nemo destroyed in a garbage disposal just before the end credits probably isn't going to happen.
dRailer on Mar 29, 2009
This was a lot funnier than Ratatouille.
Boffo on Mar 29, 2009
hahaha. #1 at the Box Office... biggest opening of the year so far... succkeeeeers!!! hahahaha
Jorge Leiner on Mar 29, 2009
I think this movie was just fine for the little kids. The giant furry mothra bug thing was a particular favorite for a lot of kids. I don't think this movie was targeted to older audiences as much. I think a few jokes for parents were given to keep them entertained while their children enjoyed the film. Shrek was a movie aimed at everyone. Families, teens, adults, everybody (whether you liked the movies or not). Monsters v. Aliens was just a kids flick.
Chris H. on Mar 29, 2009
My nephew loved the park when BOB said boobies and I kept trying to look down Ginormica dress when she was busting out of it. But it was geared towards kids who like the look of the characters and the jokes, they don't really sit there and think, "man this character needs more development" or whatever.
wm on Mar 30, 2009
I think Alex came pretty close to nailing this review right on the head. I came to similar conclusions in my review. I actually found the first ten or fifteen minutes of the movie to be very promising however it ground to a halt as soon as Monger started in with the painful exposition of the why and how of the secret monster facility.
Michael Sajkowicz on Mar 31, 2009
Honestly, I liked it. Admittedly, the movie was not exactly a show of original ideas. As mentioned in previous reviews, that was not its intent. It recycled old movie plots into a new one. The reason I write this is because many are missing what the movie did aim to accomplish: the destruction of cliches. It is very hard to find a woman in power in any past productions. Not only is the woman bigger than everyone else, but she has super strength. Though this is more common now than it used to be, it's still a step toward the right direction. That same woman, as expected, leaves the man she pined for the entire film. however, instead of trading him for a new man, like most women would do (a show of necessity for a male counterpart), she doesn't. She remains out of a relationship and instead dedicates herself to her friends and her new self. A group of men, the most powerful group in all of the USA, call upon a group in which the sole female character is the leader and the most capable member. Though she is new, she is the one that comes up with all the ideas and she is the one that saves the day at the very end, big or small! She defeats Galaxhar while she is small, showing that women are empowered no matter what. Recall the scene with the giant probe robot first enters. Sitting in the car is a woman trying to pressure a man into a sexual situation. It is she that takes the initiative to go see what happens and it is she that carries him after he breaks his ankle, an injury that he does not take with great grace and masculinity. it is she that carries him over the hill and rolls her eyes and how weak he is. The rolls are completely and mockingly reversed. Did NO ONE catch that? The normal cliche is that everyone, even the new monster's family, runs away from the transformed party. The parents did not and they did not freak out with the coming of her friends. They were completely trusting of their daughter. The same thing was true with the fiancee, Derrik. Derrik may not have liked Ginormica because they would be too different, but he did not freak out when she changed. Let's not forget that a movie for kids cannot be complex. It would go over their heads. They wouldn't get what they were seeing. The character development was appropriate for its audience. On top of that, the males are the ones that seek a woman's help. the fact of the matter is that this is a blatant show of empowering girls, and it's about time. Let's try and keep in mind that although the presentation was not necessarily inspired and original, the message was very encouraging for the neglected female audience.
Brett Johnson on Apr 2, 2009
I agree with what Alex has to say. This movie is vastly overated and no where near as good as everyone says it is. Though I don't believe Alex should have constantly compard Dreamworks to Pixar. My favorite Dreamwork's movies are Shrek 1 & 2, Kung Fu Panda, and Madagascar so I can relate to what they're saying. Yes this movie is directed towards kids, but when I went to the theater, sure there was a chuckle here and there, other than that, quite dull really. The kids seem to get impatient with the movie like they were 'expecting' something good to happen but it never came. I will give Dreamworks props for the fantastic 3D, which would blow anyone's mind, but as for the plot, it was quite sad really. Overall, this movie isn't for teens nor adults, but solely for kids, the few who liked it. The unfortunate thing is this movie could have been so much better. Hopefully Dreamworks can get it better with their next movie. And suprisingly I went to go see this movie with high hopes from what everyone was saying, but I couldn't have been more wrong.
Riku on Apr 4, 2009
Agree with Alex. It is true what some people say that if you go to see a movie thinking you aren't going to like it, your mind is made up. However, totally the opposite happened to me; I thought I would love it, but........ I can't remember my 10 year old son laughing once, even though afterwards he said he liked it (I think he was just being kind!). I have taken him to see some similar genre movies and he didn't stop laughing. I disagree with people who say 'it's for kids'. Does that mean the adults don't matter a toss? After all, who has to take the kids to see these movies? That's right...... US! Why is it that numerous kid’s movies have had me hooked right from the start? Right! Because they are made for your child, and the child in YOU! That is the formula for a good kid / parent movie. One that you can genuinely laugh with, talk about, share the best bits, etc, with your children, without just going through the motions. Don’t children feel better about being with you if you both enjoy the experience? Movie makers would do well to remember this. Isn't it why The Simpsons is such a hit with kids & adults? Not one person here (unless I am wrong) has mentioned Toy Story. A fantastically simple yet warm hearted movie that I could watch time and time again. MvA just left me cold. Where was the character development? Where was the 'schmaltz'? Where was the HUMOUR? There were parts of this movie which had you thinking 'was that supposed to be funny?'. E.g. the President playing Axl F. Why???? I also thought that each character would have a genuine reason for being in the movie, but aside from the giant woman, the characters were void of any 'Superpowers'. Over rated and over hyped. 4 out of 10.
Riggsy on Apr 9, 2009
If you didn't laugh at the Axel F - playing president then you're a cold fish. I saw this film in 3D and thought it was brilliant. The film itself was great - who cares about "character development"... and there WAS humour. Maybe you're too far up your own jacksie to see it. Riggsy - you say you could watch Toy Story again and again because it's "warm hearted". I watched it once and I thought it was okay but Monster vs Aliens was sooooo much more fun. And I'm what they call "middle aged"...!! Get over yourselves and just have a laugh, everyone.
Billy C on Apr 16, 2009
This is a perfect example of why I don't read reviews. I absolutely loved this film. If I had read a review before I went I would have perhaps missed out on a fun evening at the cinema. You people who over-analyse everything make me laugh.
James on Apr 16, 2009
To be perfectly honest I don't know why I even read the reviews on this site, its great to see the trailers however. I was extremely reluctant to see this movie after this review, but was dragged along and thought it was great. Then again this is the same guy that hated Eastern Promises, and probably had a wet dream about princess Leia last night. I saw several clever scenes that were spoofs of other movies, which the whole basically was. Just because they didn't say "we're trying to make a spoof movie" doesn't mean they didn't, what sort of statement is that? "maybe it did achieving mocking a 50's sci-fi / alien movie, but at the same time, I take what is presented to me by DreamWorks and never did it say "this is what we're trying to achieve." wtf? Lol
Daniel on Apr 19, 2009
this is one of the worst movies ever. why the hell would they put 3-D effects-to scare the little kids??? This is a movie to think about
Andrew on Apr 23, 2009
@48 Alex, he's probably just trying to promote his own website. =P
Anonymous on Apr 26, 2009
The movie was entertaining, your just nitpicking. Did you really have to be laughing so hard that you couldn't breathe to think that? Yes, the storyline has been done but slightly different. Umm... Alex you loved Friday the 13th... the biggest glorified piece of shit I've ever seen. For somebody who praises a movie that has 12 sequels of the same crap in every movie why are you complaining about a 3D Family Movie with certain elements that are the same as past stories? MVA was visually gorgeous and was a great excuse to go out and have a great time with the family. Was it award winning? Probably not. Then again, Pixar made Ratatouille... was that award winning? Hell no.
DJ Sil3nt on May 11, 2009
The movie was generally awfully- the writing was blan and predictable and the effects were nothing special. i was so bored i even forgot i was seeing it in 3D. this is no nemo
R on May 28, 2009
You people are all too cynical. My wife and I saw this opening weekend and thought it was hilarious (we're both around 30, no kids). My co-workers and their significant others (one mostly likes zombie movies, another doesn't like animation much), and they all loved it too. Monsters vs. Aliens was one of my favorite movies this year (Star Trek is the favorite so far, most looking forward to Transformers 2 and Avatar).
Pete on Jun 1, 2009
This is a great movie! But I like to see some sex dudes!
firstname.lastname@example.org on Jul 2, 2009
Ice Age (1,2,)3 > Monsters vs Aliens
Fan SF on Aug 8, 2009
i haven't seen this movie but when you insulted madagscar i just had to say something. Madagascar 2 is one of the funniest and most enjoyable movies i've ever seen and i think you, Alex should actually watch a movie before u decide to judge it. Don't make up your mind about a movie before u even see it or else you will miss out on the fun.
james on Aug 16, 2009
Its definitely a blunder worst movie by Dreamworks. I was so impressed with the trailer but when i watch the movie i felt like puking...
Rajj on Sep 2, 2009
this movie is just ok to watch 1 time
Sussane on Sep 2, 2009
The movie wasn't that bad. It was not as good as I thought it could have been either.
Hsa on Sep 14, 2009
I agree with the review , I'm amazed at how people come up with dull and ignorant ways of giving this movie credit.. Kids may find it funny but that's not the point here... Making a kid laugh isn't the most difficult thing to do.. They took all the cheapest and dullest steps of achieving that.. MvA trys to act like a movie but it doesn't feel like one professionally done.. More like a long boring CGI demo video.. done by a few sub standard graphics artists.. It's crappy movies like these that keep lowering standards.. I was amazed at how horrible..this movie was. The Graphics seem dated , the style seemed bland and felt like an old copy to a cgi thing that might've worked ages ago.. The worlds loaded with Video Games and CGI these days...these guys should try fooling someone else.. Horrible story , horrible graphics.. If you've seen the trailer , you probably dont need to watch the movie.. Because the trailers had all the so called best parts of the movie in it.. Imagine The incredibles came out in 2004 !!!! Which happens to be a million times better then this movie from every aspect. Graphically that's alot better too..
Jade on Sep 23, 2009
naah. Didn't like it. I guess I am a cold fish 🙂
graphic design Melbourne on Oct 4, 2009
Ha ha, great movie - but only for kids. Yes, probably they like it almost as I liked Aliens vs Predator 🙂
Web Design Melbourne on Nov 26, 2009
Good movie, Entertaining, Enjoyed it immensely. Found it much better than Shrek or Shrek 2 for instance. Have to say, 5 out of 10 is a very low rating for this charming feel good animation with positive female role model and "don't judge a book by its cover" moral including a cockroach hero.
Hunahpu on Dec 3, 2009
Movie is good, but only for bigger children (10+). They will probably even understand it. Me personally - I like 3D movies, and this one is technically done very good (I know nowadays almost all new cartoons are in 3D, but only slice of them are done with high quality 3D animation like we can see in this movie).
Balaton on Dec 8, 2009
In the last few years it's become necessary to preview these animated movies. Good thing we did two. our two daughters (5 and 4) and our son (2) wold probably not have done well with it because of the level of intensity. I'm looking forward to Toy Story 3. That series seems to have the right balance.
Girls Bedding on Jan 20, 2010
Well, the incredibles was kind of an earthquake animation. Not just in terms of animation, the movie has also a great story and a lot of fine humor. Everything is gone as dreamworks was integrated to the everything is soooooo cute disney machine. Sorry, don't like it anymore.
max on Mar 28, 2010
Great review...this movie is a fantastic one for the kids, the story was compelling and interesting along with a lot of humor that the kids would actually laugh at!
Pepper Spray on Apr 15, 2010
Really, the movie was pretty cool, the kids liked it a lot.
Underground guitarist on May 10, 2010
The movie was not to good, but movies like these can work e.g. shrek, incredibles, ice age, etc. are really awesome peaces.
Parkeren Schiphol on Jun 1, 2010
Agree with parkeren, is this really a blunder?
Crystal Admiral on Jun 1, 2010
Very nice to watch. Especially in 3d. Take your kids with you. Its gonna be a blast!!!
Paruresis on Jun 10, 2010
This looks like a great film. Steve Jobs is a genius ... I have yet to be disappointed by a Pixar movie yet!
speed dating new york on Jun 14, 2010
Straight off, realize that i am not specifically talking about you alex. I am 12, and i read reviews about movies i watched when i was younger and i'm like " shut the **** up. you don't know what the **** you're talking about." It irritates me when an adult writes a scathing review of a movie clearly not directed at their age group. Most adults go to these movies because their kids want to see it and they love their kids, not because they themselves want to be entertained. My parents would watch movies with me all the time because i wanted to watch it with them, even though they knew they'd hate it. If a KID watches a KID'S movie and loves it, then it's a success because that was the point in the first place.
doglover on Jun 16, 2010
pixels stuudio work is always excellen, though I haven't seen this particular movie
killer sudoku puzzles on Jun 21, 2010
thanks too much
Robert on Jun 24, 2010
Its very seldom that I agree with any of Alex' reviews but he got this one spot on, especially the"dull, mindless, and un-entertaining animated crap" part summarizes it pretty well. By the way I cant help but thinking some of the comments here are made by promotion reps. Read more: https://www.firstshowing.net/2009/03/28/monsters-vs-aliens-review-another-dreamworks-blunder/#ixzz0sQD1qUYZ
la biosthetique on Jul 1, 2010
Great review! Well written and gets to the point. i totally agree
Carterupm on Sep 3, 2010
Great writing skills 🙂
Hotel Scheveningen on Oct 3, 2010
You guys are harsh its a movie intended to make kids happy and let their imagination thrive. Who care if the adults dont like it that movie wasnt made for them. Parents dont like barney but they watch it because their kids like it.
taylor on Oct 4, 2010
Like this movie, why is it that everyone needs to like something. kids love it.
Wasmachine kopen on Oct 25, 2010
Good review men!
parkeren schiphol on Jun 25, 2011
New comments are no longer allowed on this post.