Let's be honest - entertaining, not plausible

Rating: 7/10 (19 January 2008)

I decided to write this a full 24 hours after watching the film because it usually takes me that long to come to a critical decision. If I had written this immediately after viewing the film, I would have written that it was a great movie. I never once was bored, the explosions were nice, I was satisfied because I got to see the monster and I was even more satisfied that the film never told where the monster came from. I do think audiences are sometimes better off using their imaginations because nothing is ever as creative or terrible than something you make up for yourself. People leaving the theater were complaining because they felt they hadn't been told enough. Not me - I had fun. I expected total trash. Maybe the fact that it was so much better than I anticipated lead me to overrate the film.
Yes, I was never scared. It was action-filled, but predictably so. I knew the bridge would be torn down. I told my husband that as soon as they directed everyone to the bridge. I knew they would see rats running in the tunnel and why as soon as they went into the subway. This film is not a horror film. It is an action film. At least, I do not think the intention was to scare the audience, but rather, keep them involved in the action. Predictablity is par for the course in action films.
However, I was disappointed that the film was not more realistic in some ways. I fully expected that girl to change her shoes in the department store - I would have. It would have taken the military longer to get there. I am no expert on weapons, but the monster looked soft-skinned, still, nothing hurt it. Come on, I don't believe it. A more realistic situation would be trying to escape while waiting for the military to get there with tanks and whatever else. But other things were unrealistic as well. The three people who survived the copter crash weren't strapped in as far as I could tell. If the camera's auto focus had problems in one part, why not in any other part? But, hey this camera did much that mine won't. I don't think mine would have made it after falling from the monster's mouth, let alone the crash or even some of the falls. I didn't mind the camera jumping, but the little break-ins from what was supposed to originally be on the tape were overused. Finally, the whole "Hold on to someone you love. That's what's important - love" stuff is a little too obvious. Other movies have made far more serious statements about society in far less obvious ways. Like Romero or Takashi Miike (spelling?).
I enjoyed myself. It wasn't a bad movie, but it wasn't "groundbreaking" or "unique." I certainly did not "make my entire life" as some have claimed here. I am glad I was talked into seeing it.