Matrixston Wow! Such a good movie.

Tyreece Hulme One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

Aneesa Wardle The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Fleur Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Julian R. White Its obvious this was just a rip off of the film "Cloverfield" but its not the worst thing I've ever seen. Some of the acting is convincing while some of it is incredibly bad. One thing I've noticed? Apparently when an entire room full of people scream at you to turn off a camera, you're supposed to ignore them. One thing that infuriates me is that a classic "ROOOOOOOAR" is heard throughout the city, and the 2 american girls are still scratching their heads saying "What's with all the earthquakes?". Its pretty ridiculous. Not to mention my least favorite part? You never really see much of the monster, only really what you would expect given the cover art of the DVD. This is another one of those films that proves how Americans are so much different from the Japanese and seem a lot more crude and disrespectful, but I won't get into all that. Bottom line the movie was, I suppose decent, and had an interesting story line, it just wasn't all that impressive.

Pob 75 Even bored on a rainy Sunday afternoon I could not cope with watching this. It's another "found footage" film, which in itself is not necessarily a bad thing - some of them can be good. This, however, was in my opinion unwatchable. A large amount of the run time had nothing discernible on screen thanks to the massive amount of camera-waggle and low light etc. I know some degree of this is part of the genre but in this it was far too much. Unless it was a dull (and often repetitive) piece to camera by one of the 2 main characters you could barely see anything and the waggling camera is enough to make you feel sick. This is one of those low budget films where almost nothing happens, when it does you don't see much (it's basically a monster movie with almost no monster at all) and it felt like a total waste of my time. I've thrown this away because I would feel guilty if someone else ended up paying any money for it and wasting 90 minutes of their life on it. It truly is awful.

jfgibson73 Even though this movie was a total ripoff of Cloverfield, I was still drawn in by the setup. Two girls are visiting Japan to conduct some interviews for some activist group. While filming, they are caught in an earthquake, but some of the locals claim it is something else. They start running around the city, still filming, and we find out it is a giant monster attack. At the end of the movie, the sisters get separated, and we find out that although their footage was later discovered, the girls were never seen again.For some reason, I still like the technique popularized by The Blair Witch Project, where the movie is supposedly filmed by the characters. I know a lot of viewers hate that kind of camera work, and many even claim it gets them sick. I think maybe for me, it makes me feels more like I am transported into the action of the movie, or that what I am watching feels more raw or realistic. Rec and Paranormal Activity were two movies that used this style very effectively and kept me tense all the way through. The problem with Monster is that it never goes anywhere. It doesn't build. They didn't really have any ideas, it doesn't seem planned. Just some footage of American girls running around Japan trying to avoid the destruction. We never really see the monster, which is a big letdown (except for a swinging tentacle). And they over-stylized the camera work WAY past the point of distraction. In fact, it seems like the area of the movie that the most time was devoted to was making the footage seem damaged. Except that it was so over the top, it didn't feel the least bit natural. I won't bother to try to describe the effects they used, but it was a ridiculous combination of static and jump cuts that seem intended more to cover up the fact that they had no story than anything else. I had to kind of fast forward and skip around to get through this movie, and I won't watch it again, nor do I recommend it to anyone.

wbukato Perhaps one of you, eloquent commentators, could explain how "Monster" (on the market since January 18, 2008) can be a knockoff of "Cloverfield" (on the screen since January 16, 2008)? A great show of clairvoyance or a masterpiece of film-making and marketing? There are quite a few flaws in the movie (like why the recording on the first cassettes was OK and the distorted picture/sound effects appear at the same time the monster does - if the cassettes were found later together, damaged), but they are their own flaws. Oh, and stop wondering how one camera battery could hold for so long - the girls had a few batteries, as they indicate themselves at one point.