trpuk1968

It's not the best horror movie I've ever seen but its far from the worst. Plus points: great locations and mise en scene - interior shots with the disordant op art wall paper is a real stroke of genius

Creepy and moody, pushing some profound psychological primeval buttons like mother son relationships, the terror the parent has that harm might befall their child but also that the child might be in competition with them. All very Freudian. Throw in some gaelic folklore around faeries, stolen children.

I'm not making an effort with this review suffice to say there's enough in this film to make it well worth a watch.

It is a bit untidy, yes there are some loose ends, yes it doesn't quite hold together there's a mental illness sub plot. Whats it about exactly...is it a supernatural thriller or was it all a psychotic delusion?

it deserves a better rating than its getting...

Hallucinatory plunge into the depths of the human soul certainly won't be for everyone. However, if you have the nerves its a dark, unsettling exhilaratingly wild and ultimately rewarding ride.

I agree with other reviewers about comparisons to Aguirre Wrath of God, Deliverance, Apocalypse Now, Southern Comfort as well as child soldier films such as Johnny Mad Dog or Come and See. However, Monos also bears comparison with two much older films. The first being Figures in a Landscape (Joseph Losey, 1970). This starred Robert Shaw and Malcolm McDowell as two men on the run in a bleak landscape, possibly Europe, possibly the Americas somewhere, evading soldiers, a menacing black helicopter and, on occasion, raiding villages for supplies. The second is 1985's The Emerald Forest, (John Boorman) set in the South American rain forest and exploring environmental themes through the story of a lost child. Both films address existentialist questions and lost children respectively, themes which abound in Monos, whose children are metaphorically if not at times literally also lost.

Monos is the superior film to Figures by virtue of a firmer commitment to ambiguity. Neither film indicates where, or indeed when, it's taking place. Neither film gives back story to the characters. Whereas dialogue is sparing in Monos, in Figures there's speech throughout, with both men holding forth their philosophies on life and especially women. This jars somewhat with the otherwise Kafkaesque feel and results in a film which, rather than being one of the great classic cult movies of the seventies, such as Deliverance, is more of a curious period piece, it's excessive acting and attempts at profundity over reaching and rendering it somewhat dated.

It's too long since I saw The Emerald Forest to be able to properly compare it, suffice to say I'll shortly be returning to it, assuming I can get hold of it. At the time of writing Figures was uploaded on to youtube.

The lack of a clear narrative arc and the use of multiple protagonists means that MONOS will frustrate some viewers. The film expresses ideas and notions rather than 'working through' a problem or presenting the viewer with a moral - the lack of any clear moral sense will further unsettle those who're accustomed to the conventions of narrative film.

The militia unit of eight teenagers is presumably modelled on cults / guerrilla organisations like Peru's Shining Path or Colombia's FARC. While ostensibly about child soldiers and the cynical way in which youthful idealism (and naivety) is taken advantage of and exploited by those older, ultimately MONOS is about the human condition and essentially the human animal alone in an indifferent universe. The title Monos can be read as an ironic comment - Spanish for 'monkey' in that we humans are in fact nothing more than relatively sophisticated primates.

Several themes are explored. How to live our lives, how to adjust to, negotiate the compromises the individual needs to make in order to secure the safety and advantages from the group. The consequences of the individual abnegating responsibility and prioritising transient pleasures over longer term prosperity.

The group of teenagers can be seen as a microcosm of the human race - given a cow to look after, their negligence leads to its death. The cow can be seen as allegorical of the earth which, like the cow in the film, provides for us. We're likewise custodians failing to care for, nurture and secure the earth for future generations.

There's little sense of the kids working together in a cohesive manner. Authority and order are remote, at the end of a radio. Those of a religious faith would acknowledge that any God, if we accept God's existence, has allowed humanity to get on with things by itself. My reading of the film is that we are indeed alone, in an indifferent universe, with only ourselves. God is as remote as whoever is at the end of the radio. If a saviour exists, it's in the form of Messenger (played by former FARC member Wilson Salazar), the commander who arrives intermittently. There's another analogy here with this character as a possible saviour figure and I won't reveal spoilers because my purpose is here to tell you Why You Should Watch This Film.

Camera work and different locations are really effective in conveying meaning, moving from agoraphobia on the mountain top to claustrophobia in the jungle and river scenes. Close in camera work, honing in on the characters faces conveys their bewilderment and there's an incredible visceral quality. As Messenger pushes them through their paces, the sheer futility of human existence expressed as they run on the spot, going nowhere, their feet pounding in the mud or in the water. We are animals, monkeys, of the earth and no amount of thought, ideology will change that.

The cast of largely non professionals turn in totally convincing performances all the more real for being informed by lived experiences. Apparently the director of the film invited teenagers from all over Colombia and, having narrowed down the applicants, put them through an actual military style 'boot camp.' The uncertainties and anxieties of adolescence are consistently conveyed by the young cast through facial expression, body language and movement. As is the impetuousness of that age, the compulsion and the craziness. Tension sustains, this is an edge of your seat film because we simply don't know where these kids are going or what they're planning, or going, to do.

Another way this movie triumphs is through use of sound and the incidental music, which reinforces the interior worlds of the characters. The score by composer Mica Levi is superb. I'm not a fan of music in films, however in this case less in the form of beautiful yet unsettling electronica is most definitely more hence all the more effective. The sound scape in the jungle scenes is also masterful aural sculpture, building, sustaining a sense of quiet unease, claustrophobia and a feeling of dread through the sounds of the forest.

Be warned. This certainly isn't for everyone. See it if...You like your action movies philosophical, leaving plenty of room for thought, speculation, interpretation. You can manage the dread, anxiety, apprehension you'll likely feel. A vertiginous plunge into the darkest recesses of the human condition. Just be sure to see it on the biggest screen with the loudest speakers that you can.

If you enjoy neo noir, specifically films from directors such as Michael Mann (Thief, Heat) or Jean Pierre Melville (Le Cercle Rouge especially) then this will be right up your rain slicked neon lit boulevard. Similarly it'll likely appeal to fans of 'Asian extreme' cinema and indeed anyone interested in or simply curious about contemporary China and her cultural products. Grounded in believable realism whilst being highly stylised by virtue of action taking place in locales which exist, not film sets. This isn't a China of shiny high skyscrapers and jaw dropping surveillance technologies, instead it's one of dingy backstreets, cheap restaurants, second hand stores, a cheap and plasticky sheen lit mainly with lurid artificial light. I say 'China' in quotation marks because as another reviewer pointed out it's set in a particular province using local dialect. Reminding us China isn't some monolith, that there's great diversity in this huge nation. There's an obvious debt to films by Hong Kong director John Woo - it rains a lot, most of the action takes place at night soaked in a putrid colour cast of neon and sodium street lights. Woo of course being indebted himself to an earlier generation of directors... 125cc motorbikes and scooters are, for most people living on the Latin American, Asian, African continents, their main experience of private motorised transport. Wild Goose Lake is innovative and impressive in this form of transport (rather than conventional gangster cinematic conventions of big black SUV's with tinted windows) being central to the narrative. It is something of a slow burner and I found myself restless during the first twenty minutes. Which is the point, to make you the viewer feel what the characters are feeling, inertia. Waiting. Not quite sure what's going on. If you're more accustomed to Hollywood action gangster movies this will reward but you need to be patient. Give it time and it will deliver. I promise. Don't let subtitles put you off. I watched it in France with French subtitles and didn't have trouble following. While relations between characters became confusing that didn't detract from my enjoyment this movie is driven by action and mise en scene rather than dialogue. The mise en scene or what you see works to reflect and comment on the interior psychological (and exterior) worlds of the characters. One amazing scene towards the climax set in a dimly lit apartment block alludes to trash, with the implication of the characters as literally rubbish. By contrast, another scene uses washing machines in a massively impressive stroke of sheer stylistic inventiveness. Creative violence is all the more astounding being beautifully choreographed, consisting of actual stunts instead of fast cut editing and CGI. Once again, stylistically satisfying innovativeness to the art of killing will delight martial arts fans and jaded movie goers (such as this reviewer) alike. However, what else would you expect from the culture which gave the world kung fu and pioneered the martial arts film genre? French director Jean Pierre Melville nailed the thin line dividing cops from gangsters in films like Le Cercle Rouge (a cop is literally joined to his quarry with a handcuff, said cop lives alone with his pet cats who're surely analogous to the criminals he pursues). A similar line is drawn here, making explicit the symbiotic relationship the police have with the criminals they pursue. A similar fatalism also operates and I loved the way that, even though we know where the Ge Hu character is headed, the journey there is nonetheless thoroughly enjoyable. Liu Aiai is superb as the poker faced hooker. Instead of the femme fatale, she's all the more mysterious, her motivations never quite clear. She's being used, in that sense she's the quintessential noir character caught up in events beyond her control. However she's aware she's being used and it suits her purposes to pretend otherwise. I need to watch this film again. My purpose here isn't to describe the plot but to highlight why I think you should watch this film. Finally, the total lack of irony or post modern referencing of other films is a delight. Sure there's the familiar ingredients of neo noir but they're combined into something very fresh and exciting. Watch for the astonishing 'Rasputin' disco scene and I think you'll agree.

I wouldn't have thought there was anything more left to squeeze out of neo noir then along comes this. Astounding, audacious and amazing.