All I know about this movie is that it got good reviews when it came out last year; at least, that was true two hours ago, because I’ve just watched it and now, I know a lot more. Let’s review…
Amidst an apocalyptic event, where Earth’s creatures have become giant monsters, Joel (Dylan O’Brien) lives in an underground bunker with a bunch of fellow survivors who have honed their combat skills and go to bed each night with their romantic lovers. Joel hasn’t, and Joel doesn’t; he is helpless in the face of danger, and all he provides his fellow bunkmates is Minestrone soup – that’s not a euphemism. Joel’s girlfriend from before the dark times, when they were both still teenagers, is Aimee (Jessica Henwick), who resides about 75 miles across the surface in another bunker. Joel thinks it’s time for him to take his shot, and make the crossing to be with her, the way he once promised. It’s a long shot that he’ll be able to make it, but as Joel so rightly puts it, there’s no point dying alone at the end of the world…. Michael Matthews directs.
I’ve explained this movie the best I can, but it’s the Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse style opening monologue that does it better, injecting an energy into this premise that I hoped to hell would insist – spoiler; it does. Then I spent the next ten minutes trying to place the voice of the lead actor; a voice I felt had real distinction. I couldn’t place it; perhaps it’s from an animated movie, or just a mash-up of Logan Lerman from The Perks of Being a Wallflower, Jay Baruchel’s Hiccup from How to Train Your Dragon, and Adam DeVine from Isn’t it Romantic… let’s check Wikipedia… here we go… it’s loading… ah, Dylan O’Brien; nope, he’s fairly new to me, not particularly memorable from Deepwater Horizon or American Assassin, where I’ve seen him before (The Maze Runner fans are screaming at me). So, he’s got that enthusiastic cadence that is commonly appealing – in the words of the Hugo gargoyle from Disney’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame, ‘works for me!’ At first impression, O’Brien’s character reminded me of how in serious action movies there’s always that comical character who is equally well-trained, or just as involved in the mission as the serious heroes, but is somehow still whimsical in the face of danger; I thought this movie was going to be from a perspective like theirs, which is a pretty fresh concept actually. And it kind’ve is; Joel is not as self-conscious or awkward as most unconventional heroes in these coming-of-age movies – he’s closer to the mould of Andrew Garfield’s The Amazing Spider-Man Peter Parker verses nearly all other nerdier incarnations.
The movie provides an adventure that is an amalgamation of many things we’ve seen before; it’s a bit like Zombieland, in the dynamic shared between Joel and the two survivors he comes across in the middle of movie; Michael Rooker and Arianna Greenblatt, playing the characters Clyde and Minnow respectably – Joel doodles his notes, where Jesse Eisenberg’s Columbus had his rules to survive in Zombieland. Clyde and Minnow also share a partnership similar to that of Hit-Girl and Big Daddy from Kick-Ass for mine, although the chemistry is not as strong. And if the tone was a bit more serious, anyone else get a faint Hunt for the Wilderpeople vibe too? As I’ve just been thinking back on A Quiet Place recently, and assuming this movie has a similar budget for its fantastical beasts too, it’s really clever in the way it uses shadows, sounds and larger scale shots to insinuate that there’s monsters everywhere. And when Love and Monsters does splash the cash, the CGI packs a punch with some sensorial creatures; despite being ugly, some of the monsters are transfixing, especially the Queen witchetty-grub-thing ripping through the soil. I love the idea of everyday insects morphing into global terrorise – I believe it, because I’m sure it’s science that says if grasshoppers were as big as cows, they’d be the fiercest predator on the planet; fascinating creatures, bugs.
But all this is in reference to the “Monsters” part of the movie’s title, where the real driving factor is the “Love”. Throughout the entire journey, the looming concern for Joel is whether it’s all worth it. You have to put yourself out there for love, right? But Joel hasn’t seen Aimee for years and a lot has changed. The movie is more earnest than most in handling that; people change, events change the course of people’s lives and it is an unknown whether Aimee is going to want Joel the same way that he still wants her. In life, you can’t stagnate, and the time they’ve been apart is illuminated by the fact that Joel hasn’t proven himself adaptive to the apocalypse, where Aimee is thought to be leading her colony, and up to God knows what else, and with who else. Yet, the movie never takes a cynical attitude towards love and Joel’s pursuit – sure, Minnow has been hurt, and Clyde challenges Joel’s preconceptions of meeting back up with Aimee ahead of staying safe, but Joel’s colony is the most surprisingly supportive and optimistic in wishing Joel the best. And it’s the colony’s love, as Joel’s surrogate family, that truly loves Joel. Heck, even Boy the dog loves strongly, willing to risk his life for his previous owner’s red dress. All this could have been really cheesy, but somehow it feels warm, in a bloody monster movie with giant snails, no less.
Sequel! Sequel! Sequel! There’s got to be a sequel, don’t it? I want to find out what happened with Clyde and Minnow (and I kind’ve resent the last few seconds of the movie for not leaving an excitable lose end). It just feels like there’s more to tell between Joel and Aimee – they are both now leading their tribes from two opposite sides of a monster-riddled world on a quest to find a frozen sanctuary, and I’m sure more chaotic adventures ensue. Plus, they share that departing kiss that looked more passionate than drunk karaoke, and even I, voyeuristically, want some more of that yum-yum 😋 The movie, as a metaphor for life, taking chances, and getting out there in a world full of danger, is more sub-textually significant than Bird Box, and that is to say it does it very, very well. I’m not completely sturdy where I sit on this, because I can hardly fault Love and Monsters, yet my score isn’t that high. As time passes, I think I’m going to really appreciate this movie more. A tentative 3.5 for now, with the acknowledgement that there’s a possibility I should be much higher.
3.5
Leave a Reply