Great Featurette for Gareth Edwards' 'Monsters' to Check Out
After months of waiting, Gareth Edwards' fantastic low budget sci-fi flick Monsters (watch the trailer) has finally started playing OnDemand (on your TV at home) thanks to Magnolia Pictures. They've been putting out tons of clips and promotion for the movie recently, but I found a featurette (via Vlicious) that I thought was good enough to feature this weekend. Everyone has probably heard that Monsters was supposedly shot on a $15,000 shoestring budget and this video gives you a brief look at what that was like and how Edwards and his cast/crew shot this. There's also another different featurette you can see here. Check this out below!
Watch the new featurette for Gareth Edwards' Monsters:
Monsters is written, produced and directed by Gareth Edwards, a big up-and-coming filmmaker who shot this on a shoestring budget in Mexico and did all of the visual effects on his own computer. The movie stars Scoot McNairy, who I've actually seen in commercials recently, and Whitney Able. Here's the basic concept: "Six years after Earth has suffered an alien invasion, a cynical journalist agrees to escort a shaken American tourist through an infected zone in Mexico to the safety of the US border." It's a totally amazing film that I loved when I first saw it in Cannes. Monsters is available OnDemand now and hits theaters October 29th.
Reader Feedback - 14 Comments
Saw the first 30 secs and stopped it, kinda pissed I got a glimpse of one of the things. Wanna walk into this knowing nothing except that first trailer.
Cody w on Sep 25, 2010
you know you can rent monster on itunes
Schuyler on Sep 25, 2010
great image at 2.06....looking forward to it.
tir na nog on Sep 25, 2010
Just found it on demand, going to watch tonight, thanks
ocp on Sep 25, 2010
i watched this earlier tonight. it was really great.
Brian Ricci on Sep 25, 2010
Looks really decent, ahm pretty up for checking this.
Crapola on Sep 26, 2010
Aye, looking forward to this, but made for $15K ? I call the lie. But, on the other hand....I shot a short once for $40 and it made its way to 12 festivals, so I guess anything is possible
David Banner on Sep 26, 2010
Just got done watching it on demand, I think I could write a couple paragraphs easily but lets just say its actually replaced Inception as my favorite movie of the year.
Cody w on Sep 27, 2010
#8 ^ Cody w you wrote : ... its actually replaced Inception as my favorite movie of the year. I respect your thoughts ... but ... If you don't mind let us know why you think like this ??? .. What make you think and decide that this movie is better than Inception !!?? Before you begin explaining can you answer one other question ... which movie you like to watch again Inception or Monsters ???
shero on Sep 27, 2010
I was a bit upset by the end. I liked it though.
Crapola on Sep 27, 2010
@ shero can both be an answer? I have a soft spot for low budget things like this. Overall is it a better movie? No not at all, but its MY FAVORITE because of simply what it accomplishes with so much less. I guess you cant really compare the 2 though, ones a low budget indie gem and the other is well Infrigginception. It was also because I was blown away after watching it, to correct its easily in my top 5. I will say this also, I cared more for Caulder and Sam in that 90 minutes than I did for Cobb and his annoying ass dead wife in 150.
Cody w on Sep 28, 2010
Cody w .... Thanks for the explanation My answer will be long ... I am not sure you will have time to read it .. anyway I use my reviews in my blog too that is why it is two birds in the same time 😉 ------------------------------------------------- Your words ( I have a soft spot for low budget things like this ) does not give me a great idea what you mean ... I respect some one who make a movie alone with a low budget ... But the movie must be really good ... then I will admit his work ... I am not saying this movie is bad ! But there is no way you can compare this movie to Inception . You mentioned Inception first and my question based on your words ... that is why I have no choice other than using Inception some times to explain what is the difference ! For my self I can't watch this movie one more time ... ( It is my own opinion ..but I am sure I can watch Inception at least 3 more times until the end of the year ) ...!!! What stays with you after watching this movie ??? ... For me nothing !!! What about Inception ...??? .. still people are speaking about the idea of being in dream or reality when Cobb see his children !!! Look how Nolan make you live in the movie even after you watched it !See how deep and detailed that movie is ... in another side Monsters is almost remake of district 9 and war of the worlds look of the creatures and some kind a illegal adventure in the jungle !!! a mix of stuff we saw before ... Note : Seeing the creatures are mostly in the dark or the night !!??? did you ask why is that ? Because the Director Gareth Edwards was making the CGI for the movie by himself and showing these creatures in the dark is easier than showing them in the day light !!! because in this way he can hide the details then we can't see the real look and the close up creature ! I Challenger the director Gareth Edwards to make one sequence with all the details we saw in Inception with the buildings folding upside down !!! in the same time and the same computer he got !!! .. He can't do it ... because all the CGI he does in the movie Monsters were not details .. and far away and in the dark . The scene in the end of the movie when the tentacles comes inside the supermarket ??? we saw such scene before in War of the Worlds and it was more scary than this one . The truth be said the story was not that good ... I mean what is the big deal in it .. a man and woman walk illegally from Mexico to USA !!!! and there are some Monsters !!! and they like each other in the way !!! Is that it ...!!! is this what you like about ? the connection of those two (Samantha and Andrew) !!??? By the way both they got lovers .... !! then what you care that much .. they die !!! ??? the both characters were really not that true and real that you get to care about them that much ! Now what about Inception ? There were a bunch of people who I cared about not just Cobb and his wife !! what about Arthur , Ariadne , Eames , Saito , Yusuf , Fischer ??? I think now you get an idea why some times a movie cost 150 -200 million dollars ... because they bring real actors with big names to act in it !!! because they make real big CGI shots that need at least a company who have a huge server to render the images ... and let's we don't speak about dead lines that need more Animators to work in the movie ... take a look how may people worked in Inception ... and now see how many people worked in Monsters !! that is why it need a big budget ... Here I don't want to disrespect Gareth Edwards and I worked with him once in "Heroes and Villains" ... I respect his work and it is a nice movie but it is not a big deal ... it is not that great movie that will change the history of story telling or a new way of movie making .... Every CGI lead artist can make a movie like that ! This movie remind me by the low budget movies that Asylum , Global Asylum, Nu Image Films and Millennium Films do ... I hope they give Gareth Edwards a chance to make a big movie with a big budget and then we will see if he is that good as the hype show him . ---------------------------------------------- Even the poster was not good ... https://www.firstshowing.net/2010/09/02/another-fantastic-poster-for-gareth-edwards-monsters-lands/ because it was a low ripp off of the movie Right At Your Door's poster : http://www.impawards.com/2007/right_at_your_door_xlg.html
shero on Sep 28, 2010
Everything looks the same, blah blah blah. Inception was shit, load of fucking rubbish like Dark Knight, away and go rim Nolan, he he he ah ha hh h ah hah ha h ahh a ha h ah ah a hah ah ah ahaaaaaaaaaaaah.
Crapola on Sep 28, 2010
I saw this last weekend on the Xbox 360. To the person who doesn't want to know anything about the movie except for that first trailer - bad news. That first trailer IS the movie - almost in chronological order too. The quality of this film is off the charts for the amount of money spent to make it. (The SyFy channel could learn A LOT from Gareth Edwards.) The story though is padded and very thin - too much repetitious talk about fiances and missing a kid's birthday - and yes the big monster scenes don't happen until the last reel. It's certainly no District 9 - and DEFINITELY no Inception - but it is still a good, if meandering, sci fi lite flick shot in beautiful locations.
William on Sep 29, 2010
Sorry, new comments are no longer allowed.