A new kind of monster movie?
928736
This movie kind of reminded me of Kafka for some reason:
no offense, but $200
for 15 minutes of being John Malkovich
seems over priced?
The acting is first rate and the script is is just kind of awesome in the way you get to hate the John Cusack character who is
pretty much the anti-hero of this modern surreal drama.
In the end I guess I liked it, but I wouldn't take kids to see it.
1597375
I rather liked this bony monster; it was interesting.  I thought it was a unique concept well designed.  I even loved his bony horse and the ash cloud they galloped in.  But is this a horror flick rife with social commentary?  I don't know.  The story involves a corrupt land developer who wantonly desecrates an ancestral burial ground, reburying artifacts and hiding whatever skeletal remains his workmen find.  Working late one night, three of his men uncover the unearthly remains of the Bone Eater.  Gasp.  All three men are promptly `dusted' into smithereens.  Well, they asked for it.  (So many people in this movie disappeared into clouds of dust that it was impossible for the local constabulary to keep up with the reports of who was missing.  A lot of the body count went unnoticed.  How sad, not to have anyone report you missing.)

There is no way you can take this movie seriously.  It's a fun wacky idea and better still, features some old TV favorites in small roles: William Katt as Doctor Boombas, Walter Koenig as Coogan, Veronica Hamel as Commissioner Hayes, Gil Gerard as Big Jim Burns (who would name their kid Big, seriously).  In the starring role as Sheriff Steve Evans, there is the always dependable Bruce Boxleitner.  His only misfortune is having to deal with a part time snotty daughter home for the summer (spare me the typical angry teenager).  And if one villain is good, two is even better (Adoni Maropis as the EVIL Johnny Black Hawk.  He has a mighty big knife that he becomes very attach to).

Love this movie; it's dopey, yes, but a great pleasure to behold.  Every so often, I find myself pulling it out of the collection to watch; I'm glad I bought it (cheap).
2867027
In pursuit of films featuring people turning into monsters, I will watch most anything (at least once).  And because filmmakers today have long neglected this genre, I'm forced to scrape the bottom of the barrel in hopes of finding a hidden gem.  This, however, is not one of those.  This is a flightless turkey that should have ended up in someone's stew.

The plot features a mineralogist (Chase Cordell) who seems incapable of keeping his shirt on, getting bopped in the head with a `lunar' meteorite.  A fragment of said meteorite lodges deep in his brain (they had to produce several X-rays to prove that).  Every time the full moon comes out, he morphs into a giant lizard.  He starts killing people left and right.  Naturally, the medical community is quick to offer aide and comfort to the killer until they realize the meteorite has disintegrated.  Thank goodness someone remembers a Native American legend concerning the exact same thing happening eons ago.  Not to worry, they expect him to self-combust at any moment.....barring a friend shooting him first with an arrow tipped with part of the original meteorite.

Gosh, it's amazing the things people will put on film and expect other people to watch.  This horror flick has very little going for it except the scene where the mineralogist wakes up in a hospital wearing polka dot PJs for pity sake!  Otherwise, all the performances are painfully awkward and unnatural.  The dialog is hilarious but it's not supposed to be.  The camera work is static.  The monster looks like a guy in a lizard suit.  They even tossed in a musical interlude that they refused to interrupt while they continued with the story.........silently.  I don't even want to talk about the character called Longbow.
2136810
This nifty little mash-up of "Predator" and "The Creature From the Black Lagoon" and many other B-trope movies is imminently enjoyable if you can check your brain in at the door.  Never mind that a deep sea monster is amphibious, or that it should choose to hunt on land instead of the ocean's depths, the monster(s) in question look good and we see them often and in daylight/ well-lit situations.  The CGI is not overdone and, when it comes to the monsters, far better than your average sci-fi channel fare (I won't discuss the explosions).  The acting is also quite good.  Characters are consistent and believable (but you won't find any bikini-clad girl in peril a la the cover).  There are moments of gruesomeness as the monster attacks and eats people, often leaving disemboweled portions of bloody carcasses spread across the ground and for this reason only would I say that this is not appropriate for pre-teens and under; it would just be too scary.  Kudos to director Paul Ziller.

I would recommend this movie as a standalone at a cheap price but you can also get it, cheaply at that, in a three movie pack under the appropo "Maneater" series; that particular fest also includes "Croc" (decent fare) and "Shark Swarm" (ugh! almost 3 hours of maudlin melodrama suitable for an afternoon soap opera--avoid at all costs!).
4172060
This is one of those unrealistic 80's monster movies. But I consider it a parody of two movies-The creature from the black lagoon and a little like Alien (the first one)

WARNING:Spoilers ahead

CFTBL:The swarm of mutated fish men from the sea

Alien:The part at the end where peggy has the fish creature baby-In alien, in the beginning, an alien breaks out of the girls stomach while shes in bed.

this movie is so corny, its funny! I was laughing the whole time while watching this. Its a fun movie!
425062
This movie is what horror is supposed be about, the chase, tongue and cheek ,nudity and a undead(unreal)monster. Not those torquer films like Saw or Hostel. Make some sequels.
2530804
"Invasion of Astro-Monster" (or "Monster Zero" as the title card claims) is a decent little sci-fi movie. It is a Godzilla movie....to a degree. While "Astro Monster" does feature Ghidorah, Godzilla and Rodan, the creatures take a back seat to the main villains in the film, the invading aliens from Planet X. The evil space men want to take over the earth and plan on using the terrible trio of monsters to do so.

This is actually a decent little movie, if you enjoy simple 1960's sci-fi. The storyline of invading aliens using our monsters against us is pretty innovative, and an interesting way to utilize these already familiar critters in a new way. If you are looking for non-stop rubber-suited monsters fighting then this won't be the film for you. The monsters are used more as props, and only take up about 20 minutes of screentime. The majority of the film is focused on the two astronauts who work to stop the alien invasion.

While Godzilla flicks aren't exactly known for their character development, "Astro Monster" is the exception to that rule. The relationship between the two astronauts and the budding romance between an inventor and one of the astronaut's sister form the backbone of film. While not great if you want repeated scenes of Tokyo getting demolished, not bad if you want a little more storyline with you giant lizard mayhem. Plus I liked the special effects, the monsters look good when they are used, the destruction raining down from the invading saucers looked cool as well.

So really it all depends on what your looking for, some giant monster fights - go to another title. Some fun 60's sci-fi with some monster scenes sprinkled in..give this one a shot.
72208
(This review is for the 3D version that I watched on my new Sony 4K TV with passive 3d, with content from DirecTV.)

I have to admit, I'm getting a little tired of the modern-day push for the so-called "Strong Female Lead" (SFL) character.  I just find it to be a little too pandering, and what's actually happening:  MEN are now losing out on a lot of roles because of it.

And this movie is called "Mad Max," isn't it?  And yet, in reality, it probably should be called "Mad Furiosa," because Charlize Theron is really the main character, while Tom Hardy is only just extra baggage.  To be fair though, even though Mr. Hardy is a man of few words here, he is still really good.

But still, if there IS going to be that SFL character that I brought up in paragraph one, at least she is played by Ms. Theron.  She is one of the strongest actors (actresses?) of our day; if you disagree with me, just catch any of her films -- why not "Monster"?  She's terrific there.  And I'll begrudgingly admit that she's terrific here as well.  But would you expect anything less from her?

It is nice that this film isn't just a reboot of the original, and it is nice that this film isn't just a remake of the original.  As a matter of fact, it is nice that this film isn't any of those other "re"s that I hate.  This is perhaps a continuation of the story, albeit with different actors.  Hey, while I may be the only fan that Mel Gibson has left, he's naturally too old to play this part.  So they had to bring in some new blood.

And you surely will see plenty of blood here.  And I usually will get more than just bent out of shape if a movie is too violent, but violence IS necessary in this film to make it work.  If you've seen the earlier films, you know how it goes.  It does remind me of more recent Quentin Tarantino films, where he really learned HOW to use violence and WHEN to use it.  If done correctly, violence in film will not seem exploitative.

Well I could say, "I'm tired of all these damned Strong Female Leads nowadays!  I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!"  But when you have Charlize Theron, well, you don't really have a right to complain.
3456060
It would make a good movie. Like one of those syfy channel movies. It'd be way better than sharknado that's for sure
262321
Are you bored of zombies and vampires?
Well, it is time for the fight between the demons and the gargoyles, and the inevitable
involvement of a unique creature on the side of the good in the fight against evil.
Although the plot is simple, yes the fight between good and evil, the depiction of the
two sides is interesting, especially the ascending and descending parts (must watch the movie, i don't want to spoil it).
The special effects are quite good but I wish that martial arts were not involved. I mean how about some straight
dirty fighting and not choreographed fighting scenes. Really, all creatures learn martial arts? I mean there must
be a super sensei somewhere out there!!

It is a good movie, fun to watch, and it adds something to your sci fi knowledge!
1249309
Monster of the week movies have become something of a Syfy staple.  I've seen so many that I can write the script with my eyes closed: human with grudge tracks monster, monster shows human-like intelligence, cutting-edge technology is used to capture the beast, a person is dragged screaming off-camera, interference from petty humans prevents the beast from being caught, and sometimes if the director's feeling generous the human bad guy gets eaten by the monster.  So it's surprising when a monster movie gets a mainstream release.

Perhaps that's why Primeval is so insecure about being a monster movie.  Instead, its trailers try to place Primeval in the slasher genre, claiming that the killer has eaten over 300 victims and he "might not even be human."  That's the only bit of truth to be found in the trailer.  The killer isn't human at all --  he's Gustave, a 60-year-old, 20 foot long, 1-ton crocodile.  The plot is taken from the 2004 documentary Capturing the Killer Croc, which features a naturalist who, along with a documentary team, took on the monster.  Patrice Faye, a Burundi naturalist, sought to capture Gustave in revenge for his colleague who was supposedly eaten by the beast. Sometimes these movies write themselves.

Primeval has Jacob Krieg (Jurgen Prochnow) filling in for Faye and instead of a colleague it's his wife that was eaten by the croc. Just as in real life a film crew is assembled to capture the beast, and Gustave's name is in fact namef after Burundi's then president, the ruthless former army major Pierre Buyoya (a Tutsi).  The camera crew, led by Tim Manfrey (Dominic Purcell), love interest Aviva Masters (Brooke Langton), and stereotypical comedic relief Steven Johnson (Orlando Jones), play up the fish-out-of-water element of their foolish venture to the hilt.  It quickly grates.

But back to that plot. Of course our heroes have a peculiar tracking device that pings.  The pinging gimmick debuted in Aliens and has been oft-repeated - here it brings shades of the ticking crocodile that swallowed Captain Hook's hand from Peter Pan. Eventually the two plots converge - Little Gustave and Big Gustave - into one unlikely denouement.  Unfortunately Primeval takes its time to get there.

What's surprising about Primeval is how little of the monster is in the monster movie.  This is as much a rant against American-imperialism, with its high-minded ideals that fell far short of stopping the Rwandan genocide, as it is about a killer crocodile.  And that's the secret Primeval was trying to conceal all along with its deceptive trailers: the Primeval title is about the cruelty of man against man.
2953788
I thought that there could be nothing new to film about Frankenstein until I saw this movie. Aaron Eckhart gives a stellar performance as the Monster. The addition of demons and gargoyles as protagonists to my mind is the perfect twist on this legendary creature. If you enjoy creative scifi add this movie to your list. Also the special effects were glorious.
1826207
This movie is very good but the movie called "Monster" don't fit for this movie. It should be something better than "Monster" tho! The reason I put 5 stars is because this movie is very good but it has nothing to do about the name of the movie tho. This movie should be go for Selby And Lee or something else but Monster?? Come on!!
4007178
I like this movie, a little slow in the beginning, but it's pretty good, considering, its low budget. Besides, I'm a sucker for monsters that attack where there are no obvious ways to overcome it, keeps me interested.
4542211
I had previously seen parts of this in a public venue and it looked surprisingly good, so I decided to include it in my ongoing sci-fi & horror marathon.
It is generally good to be very leery of reboots and remakes - whatever happened to original ideas, anyway ? - but this movie does in fact offer a fresh new take on the Star Trek franchise, it's a fast-paced action movie with a young cast who actually do resemble their 1960s TV series counterparts without being carbon copies of them.
The story doesn't make a great deal of sense, especially after they bring the trans-dimensional 'older' Spock into it, but maybe it makes moire sense in the book......
Just kidding.
187306
Fun, Different.

Not a traditional horror, nor sci-fi. I liken it to Alien, but with crappier special effects. There isn't the wholesale slaughter you see in many "monster movies" and the town and it's people were creepy enough before the whole creature in the woods thing. People are led to believe it is due to stupid human's deforesting our planet, and unleashing ancient things, but the ending makes me think that the director was clever and sent his message while not leaving you with weak absolutes.

For those of you who enjoy hollywood endings, found footage films, or the traditional good versus evil, I probably wouldn't recommend if those are your only tastes. If you're one who enjoys clever understatement and dark movies that hold just as much psychological involvement as they do danger, then you might enjoy this film immensely.

If you're looking just for a popcorn movie, then maybe skip this one - it's fairly cerebral in a certain sense. While everyone in the film is some kind of backwoods (and maybe a little backwards) hick, the best parts of the film to me were the ones that said volumes silently with tension and subtlety.

Also, I loved the whole "grim dark" at the end. Some might not like that bit, but to me the movie would've suffered at least 2 stars if they hadn't included it.
4757823
This movie is a little different that the traditional vampire flick...maybe some similarity with the Blade series. I wouldn't go as far as to say its a totally original idea. The effects are good and the acting is decent enough to end up with a well-polished horror movie.