A banal and flat affair.

Rating: Null/10 (3 April 2009)

Every once in a while, a children's animated film will come out that is tailored towards children, and yet written from an adult frame of mind—like the best works of Roald Dahl, such works usually incorporate both the younger and older audiences into their respective appeal. More often than not however, the animation genre is one flooded with tired clichés, dry, disconnected vocal performances and mundane writing fit only for the minds of those unaccustomed to the more substantive forms of entertainment. It's the kind of writing that is not only targeted at children, but consistently feels like it was written by them; unsurprisingly, the little ones will get some kick out of it all, but for everyone else (and I include some of the more discerning of children in this exception), Monsters Vs. Aliens will instead only mildly distract with its pretty pictures and sporadically amusing farce.
What's most surprising about the extremely derivative writing present within the movie's script however, is that it comes directly from chaps involved with quite a few of the genre's most enjoyable and original outings. Yet constantly burdened with lame plotting, contrived moments of three-dimensional dazzle, and jokes that grow calluses on their proverbial faces after the first act, Monsters Vs. Aliens is a remarkably dumb, forgettable affair that is sure to induce more yawns than laughter. Of course, it's rather unfair to judge a children's movie purely on an adult perspective, and so I must concede that younger viewers will inevitably enjoy the experience quite a bit more than adult counterparts; but not by much.
You see, part of what makes a good animated film the nice breath of fresh air for adults, and the sweet piece of candy it is for children, is usually reliant upon one thing; the characters. It's disappointing then that Monsters Vs. Aliens lacks any definable, or memorable personas within its ensemble. Sure enough, there's B.O.B., the gelatinous blue blob who inherits Seth Rogen's signature dumb-ass laugh (which still isn't getting old, believe it or not), and even a surprising addition of Stephen Colbert as an obnoxious United States President (go figure), but even these two mildly amusing additions never truly come off the screen. Not only is it frustrating to be forced to artificially root for a protagonist we're never really given a chance to care about (that's Susan by the way, played by a bland Reese Witherspoon), but there is also a distinct lack of comic relief to the whole thing—in fact, the best parts to Monsters Vs. Aliens aside from Colbert's brief appearances, are all the cool space shots and action sequences.
This of course, brings us to the primary reason many people will be seeing the feature in the first place; the 3D. As a separate medium, or movement on its own, the three-dimensional movie has yet to truly take off, but with frequent glimpses into what the technology can do over the past few years (and with many in line for this year alone), there's no denying that those images at least do tend to take the breath away. Seen through comfortable glasses, Monsters Vs. Aliens can be a wonderful treat for the eyes. There's the beautiful exterior shots, and the close-quarters actions sequences which all flow terrifically and jump out at you in ways that aren't always contrived for the sake of milking the technology. Yet for the good that it does for the movie's aesthetic appeal however, the overall impression is that without such an artificial distraction, Monsters Vs. Aliens would be a banal and flat affair.
The problem is that despite the awe-inducing animation and sometimes amusing performances, the majority of the feature is actually devoid of any life. The story, which I have neglected to give a synopsis of, simply because I have deemed it largely unnecessary (okay, so aliens come to take over Earth, and monsters have to stop them), is so predictable and formulated that it will literally take a child who has seen no more than five movies to not see everything that's coming. Furthermore, there's also the complete lack of character, humour and heart that are key to delivering an enjoyable and memorable experience fit for both the children, and the adults who have accompanied them. Children will find B.O.B. funny, and they will laugh whenever his buddy Missing Link (Will Arnett) bangs his head on something, but that's about it—ask them who their favourite character was and they'll probably just say "the blue guy". Why? Because he's silly and brainless, much like the script in which he resides; and yet he is the highlight of the feature so what does that say? - A review by Jamie Robert Ward (http://www.invocus.net)