This is how not to do it.

Rating: 2/10 (5 March 2009)

This film really does collect comments way, way above its actual status or significance. Everything that might have made it good has been done before and better. Huge monster? Godzilla right on through the whole series. Things that come out of nowhere for no reason and kill you? Alien; The Thing; Halloween. Characters we don't care about getting what they may or may not deserve? Jaws. Shaky video? Blair Witch. So may I add my pennyworth as to why it collects so many comments? It is missing suspense. We "know" from the outset that everyone dies, and there isn't even the trick of a last scene in the chopper saying, "Don't drop the camera!" before a receding shot of the chopper's tail-fin. We "know" the monster gets killed eventually, cos there's someone around to dig the camera up. We certainly know that these people are supposed to be just average guys caught up in bad stuff, but they don't do anything to make their eventual fate interesting or to suggest that they have any real sense of danger. And in fact we "know" that the only source of danger here is monsters. There's nothing else out there in the dark; no other human interaction e.g. someone carjacking them in a panic or any other physical threat. Even scrambling across busted skyscrapers doesn't look dangerous, because the idiot with the camera still has it in his face and is busy filming. Because it is missing suspense we are left looking for plot or explanation. And of course the makers were banking so much on suspense that they left that out completely! And because there is neither suspense nor plot nor explanation we are not willing to suspend our disbelief. The only hook left is, "that is a really cool monster! I'd pay good money to see a monster like that!" Sorry, folks, the monster is dreck too. I though CGI was meant to keep a sense of scale, but if you watch the bad camera-work the thing seems to change size worse than Grape Ape used to! In the end the thing looks the size of a block of flats (and that would be about right) so why does it bother to eat one bloke lying around on the ground? And then spit him out? Ah, well, there it is, I think. It wasn't much of a film to start with and then it dispensed with all the things that might have made me forgive it. And I have forgiven worse things in my time! Wiser heads than I have pointed out the things that just can't be believed, but I'm going to give the merit award to the invulnerability of the monster because this is a common Hollywood trait. Humans are actually very, very good at killing things and causing mayhem and damage. Modern warfare is more terrifying and devastating than most of what Hollywood usually shows, which is why A Bridge Too Far can still be shocking. Having a lame monster like this wandering around the place and pretending we can't stiff it in five rounds rapid...that's both sad and a worrying pretence that war is harmless fun for the lads.