Monster

Rating:
Summary: more a review of the reviews I suppose....
Review: Slight spoiler alert toward the end....
Most the reviews of this film I've seen all seem to be under the assumption that the film maker here was trying to "Get inside" the mind of a serial killer, or show an understanding of Aileen's motives and rational behind the murders she commited. In my opinion it's a mistake for any viewer of this film to go into the theatre expecting the film to analyze the whole Aileen Wurnos controversy and by the end of watching it expect to be a little more wiser as to how and why this type of person comes about in our society and how they come about commiting such crimes. It's just not that sort of film. To me all this film is, is a little window in to the lives of two people. It just so happens that these two people are Aileen Wuornos and Tyria Moore. This film isn't there to answer any questions or justify any moral points, or be a vehicle to show the talents of the make up departments ability to change a stunning Hollywood actress into dirty trailer trash. It just shows a dramatic representation of some events that occured in two peoples lives and to show the humanity that can occur behind two people who find themselves in this bizzare situation. And it does it very well. The acting is of a very high standard and the story is told very solidly, depicting the facts. I didn't feel like I was being made to make any judgements on the characters and their actions in this film, I didn't feel like I was being made to expect a happy ending, it was just an interesting story being told in an interesting way.
Another point I cannot understand with the majority of reviews of this film is how the reviewers seems to be under the impression that this film is somehow obliged to provide us with a happy ending, and when we don't get a happy ending then the reviewer feels somehow cheated by the film. Not all art is beautiful, nor is it supposed to be. As art is supposed to be a reflection of life then it would be wrong for all films to have a happy resolution. But then loking at it another way the film DOES have a happy ending really, (...) I liked this duality of the film. In the words of Dr. Pepper, Try it you might like it!!

Rating:
Summary: painful, startling and real
Review: I went to see this movie expecting to be disturbed. What I didn't expect was the ability of Charlitze Theron to make us care about Aileen, a character, who, when all is said and done, is not an appealing person.

Charlitze's Oscar was well deserved; she spoke the truth, however, in calling Christina Ricci the unsung hero of this film. Ricci played off Theron in a beautifully subtle way; Selby initially comes across as innocent and in need of protection, but the viewer gradually sees that she is another in the long chain of people who have used Aileen, and that a pattern in Aileen's life is being perpetuated. The final scene in particular is amazingly handled by the director and cast.

Another issue this story made me think about is how hard it is for someone like Aileen to try and 'go straight'--society simply gives people like her no chance. That the movie accomplished this without beating the viewer over the head with it and trying to force us to feel pity is greatly to the director's credit.

All in all, I was impressed with the quality of the movie and the two main performers, but would add the caveat that those who do not like unsettling or disturbing stories will not enjoy it.

Rating:
Summary: Controversial yes, but nevertheless very powerful...
Review: The fact that Charlize Theron gives an unforgettable performance plus that "Monster" is very intimidating has been told in detail by most reviewers here, so instead, i'll take on the objections voiced by those who feel that this film is portraying a serial murderer in a way so she comes across as "more human".

First off, some people claimed that the film is not accurate and that Aileen Wuornos (the real life killer) was nothing more than a cold blooded murderer. Aside from the first murder, which even in the evidence presented in court, was shown to have been committed in self defense after a savage rape, the film does show that eventually Wuornos killed for the money. Or did she?

The reason i feel that this film does a good (but not quite great) job of going below the surface is because it shows us this woman's life without resorting to cheap sensationalism and without overstating or understating anything. This woman, like many 1000s, or even millions of people, basically live in that fringe of our society that resembles hell. She acquired street wits in the process but she also acquired brutal hopelessness, terminal despair, and ultimately distrust for anyone around her.

When she gets in an affair with Selby, this relationship becomes to her the only way to exit the giant toilet bowl she virtually lives in. Problem was, like with many other things in life, she had no clue how. In her particular case, the fact that she wound up killing for a mere $200 shows what type of despair we're talking about. It's an old argument really, but one that wont go away no matter how hypocritically some of us choose to look at things, that is: anybody in our societies, "good" or "bad" is a direct product of that society. And that's undeniable, noone drops suddenly from the sky and lives amongst us.
The character in "Monster" eventually comes to the point to treat people as she was treated. Yes, noone killed her physically (except the state in the end) but she had been morally and mentally "murdered" countless times before she turned into a murderer herself.

Charlize Theron is incredible not because she took on 40 pounds and was made ugly to play this film, but because she stunningly managed to portray the mess in this woman's soul. That's the part of her acting that gave her the Oscar, which by the way - I felt- was one Oscar well deserved after a long, long time.
But the same counts for the director of the film who manages to capture a life between rainy highways and back seats of cars, filthy apartments, sleazy bars with other hopeless characters, and ultimately a vast scape of nothingness. That's where the "Monster" was bred in and lived in.

As for those who might've been offended with the film's language or the themes presented in it, well that's a true paradox, because that's like admitting that reality offends them. Sure, one can choose to avoid reality, but that never really works in the long run as "what's there" eventually -and always- catches up with us no matter what medium we use to avoid it.

"Monster" is a truly good film, and in my opinion, whatever objections can be raised are either trivial or hypocritical.
C.Theron is not the only one giving a great performance by the way. Christina Ricci is up to par with her even if this goes "unnoticed" as Theron's role is inevitably overshadowing.
A film that intimidates with its rawness and its ultra-realism, "Monster" is one that wont let you easily forget it. Nor should you, if you ask me...

Rating:
Summary: Applause ! Applause !!
Review: Three years ago I told people to watch Theron she was going to be a big star, climbing that fame ladder by carefully choosing small co-starring roles with big name actors until this small movie, big role came her way. By no stretch of the imagination is this a feel good movie however give her full marks, Theron stuns with her performance as a serial killer and in so doing thoroughly deserves the multi accolades showered on her by the movie industry - in my humble opinion perhaps the best performance by an Oscar winner actress since Foster's late 1980's "The Accused" and Streep's early 1980's "Sophia's Choice".

Rating:
Summary: Begrudgingly, 5 stars
Review: What I've been pretty surprised by when I hear this movie being discussed is the fact that most people point immediately to the performance by Charlize Theron, saying that it's almost as if you're not watching an actress but the real person she's playing. My confusion is first of all that I can't help thinking: isn't a good acting job contingent on a number of things? Like the dynamic between the characters?
My problem with this movie is that there just isn't enough real interaction between the protagonist and Selby to make it seem as if we really AREN'T just watching two actors in front of a camera. Perhaps this stems from the problem of trying to fashion characters who were real people and whose history the writers of this film must have been familiar with. I'm sorry but the characters just don't seem to have any free will of their own. I was disappointed with what they "did" with this story: it's such an unlikely romance that exists between the two main characters, singularly beautiful, but I don't believe the unique nature of their relationship is ever really adequately illustrated for us. It's as if they wanted to make these characters more likeable or even more believeable by domesticating them, but forgot that the movie isn't ABOUT an everyday person, it IS about a societal "monster". There seems to be chemistry between the two main characters, but an almost "professional" kind that only exists between actors. And as far as Charlize Theron's performance, sorry again: she's just not a very nuanced character and aside from the nuisance of the makeup, ANYone could have played this role as well as her.
Now, since this IS a five-star review I need to backtrack a little. I give this movie five stars because it has more than a few "moments". Some of it, in fact, borders on amazing. I won't describe specific scenes, I'll only say that the director managed to make a movie that is shocking, heartbreaking, even comical at times, and which still manages not to "preach" as one might expect it to. I would say, Whether you think you're going to enjoy this or not, watch it. The last scene is very simple and powerful and it alone makes this movie worth watching.

Rating:
Summary: Much more than a performance
Review: "Monster" is my second favourite movie of the year. An amazing movie about Aileen, the first female serial killer. The movie is really dark, strong and violent, but it also has a sweet and human side. I personally felt bad for Lee. Sure, she killed people and deserved to pay for it, but I could relate to her in some way and I understood her pain. The performance by Charlize Theron is simply amazing, the best performance I have seen since Björk in "Dancer in the Dark", if not better. Christina Ricci was overlooked, she also gave a brilliant performance and should have been nominated. The direction is flawless and the soundtrack is awesome. All the songs were used perfectly. "Monster" is a movie I will never forget.

RATING: 9/10 or A

Rating:
Summary: Okay, okay, it was a good performance...
Review: Yes, we now know Theron created a "magnificent, breathtaking, spine tinglingly heart smashingly resonantly beautifully" character. Her personal technique, which draws upon moments of transcending personal emotion often distracts from the reality of Aileen Wuornos' lack of emotion; in a sense, Theron brings a dimension to Wuornos which was actually never present. Wurnos as a two dimensional 'monster' is played by Theron as a three dimensional killer, with masculine tendency. If one studies footage of Wuornos, her femininity in a physical sense is far more pronounced than that of Theron's depiction. I draw comparison to spark some actual debate as to the performance itself. Theron herself is a fine observer of human tendency and characteristics, she is certainly not a mimic (which would have destroyed the integrity of the performance). If we are to dub this performance as the Greatest in the History of Cinema, we need to consider the reality of the subject the film is dealing with. We need to dissect whether or not this "Monster" is the object of common American desecration, the least American form and thus the penultimate outcast, or simply an ugly, abused person with a severe psychiatric condition. Does Theron contribute to a dimension which was never present, or am I simply ignoring the common thread of actor's intuition, to "bring an element of oneself into the character, be it empathy or personal recollection"?

Rating:
Summary: WARNING This film should have been rated at least NC -17
Review: I saw this movie in the movie theater and felt assaulted. The language was vulgar and unending in its relentless onslaught. The rape scene was very intense. Charlize Theron's character is naked tied up across the front seat of a car while her attacker pours alcohol over what appears to be burns while she screams and then he gets a metal pipe to rape her with from behind. Not to mention the lesbian sex scenes. When I saw Matrix I wondered why the film got an R rating? What? you get an R for the 1 billionth slow-motion karate chop? I do not consider myself a prude. I watch my share of porn, and usually "enjoy" an occasional intense dramatic movie. This movie was too much for me. If you are a person with abuse issues or if you have teenagers, this is NOT the movie for you. Having said all that Charlize Theron did give the performance of a lifetime.

Rating:
Summary: Charlize Theron gives the performance of a lifetime
Review: I think this is unquestionably the most astonishing performance in all of movie history. I never thought anyone in the whole wide world could act so powerfully and authentically that you feel as if they're living another person's life right before your eyes. Charlize is such an extraordinary actress to be able to do that as Aileen Wuornos. I couldn't believe my eyes as I was watching this movie at the theatre. There wasn't a fraction of a second that I wasn't compelled by this performance. It was 100% flawless. It was REAL. Charlize wrenches your emotions severely as she plunges you deep into the tragic life of prostitute/serial killer Aileen Wuornos and genuinely conveys her terrifying fierceness and heartbreaking emotions. It gripped me so tightly that I just couldn't take my eyes off the screen for one moment. I have never seen a performance so effective or tear-jerking in my life. I cheered bigtime when Charlize won the Best Actress Oscar, because to not award someone an Oscar for such a performance that defines ultimate acting would be one of the greatest injustices ever.

Rating:
Summary: Different Monster.....Same Oscar (3.5 stars)
Review: This movie would have been just ok had it not been for the lead actress, Charlize Theron. What a phenomenal performance!! Similar to Halle Berry in Monster's Ball, Charlize made this movie better than average. There is no question why she won an Oscar for this performance. She actually becomes this woman. She, like Halle, took a chance w/an independent film and scored big time!

I didn't feel that the movie itself really developed the characters enough to empathize w/them; especially given the fact that this movie was based on a true story. Charlize plays (Aileen Wuornos), a serial killer who had issues since early adolescence. Christina Ricci (Selby Walker) plays Aileen's love interest through a chance meeting at a lesbian bar.

The movie basically shows how, through some initial resistance on Aileen's part, they eventually become a couple. Aileen takes on the controlling role while Selby the submissive one. You can see that the bitterness both suffered in their past was a strong bonding force for the two. However, I really didn't feel the chemistry between the two that the movie was trying to convey.

I happened to see this movie by chance at a matinee. Because of Charlize's breakout performance, it made it all worthwhile. She deserves her new ranking among the "A-List" actresses. I look forward to her next film.