Love And Monsters Review

Love and Monsters review
Seven years after the Earth has been overrun by a mutant monster apocalypse, Joel Dawson (Dylan O’Brien) leaves his underground colony to find his girlfriend Aimee (Jessica Henwick). Can the twentysomething with no survival skills make the 85-mile trip to reconnect with the love of his life?

by Ian Freer |
Updated on
Release Date:

14 Apr 2021

Original Title:

Love And Monsters

A nominee in this year’s Best Visual Effects Oscar category, Love And Monsters is an unheralded treat. Michael Matthews’ enjoyable romp comes from no previous existing IP, features no A-list talent and comes with a modest price tag, but rises above the pack through smarts, invention and a neatly judged tone. Denied a cinema release by Covid (the plot has echoes of the pandemic, with a whole world frightened to go outside), it’s a crying shame, as its imagery merits the big screen and its sense of adventure deserves a full house.

Love And Monsters

The premise is laid out in voiceover and nifty illustrated sketches. To prevent giant asteroid Agatha 616 from destroying the Earth, scientists devised a series of rockets that blew the rock to smithereens. The downside is that the chemical compounds employed to launch the missiles fell back down to Earth and turned the animal kingdom into the kind of mutant monsters beloved by Ray Harryhausen (why it didn’t affect humans is never addressed). Under siege, the human race subsequently hid in underground bunkers. The disaster was particularly bad timing for our narrator Joel (Dylan O’Brien), who was just about to hook up with new girlfriend Aimee (Jessica Henwick) when the pair were separated and holed up in different colonies. Cut to seven years later when Joel, the only singleton in a loved-up bunker, is left feeling alone and useless after an Aliens-style breach, and decides he is going to make the 85-mile trek above ground to reunite with his love.

_Love And Monsters_ gets its spirit from Amblin without ever trying too hard to be too Amblin-y.

By its very nature, Love And Monsters is episodic, but it’s an engaging journey. The visuals of a world overrun by giant critters — a spider’s web covers the outside of a house, bicycles are lodged high in tree-tops — are imaginative and the monsters, including out-sized centipedes, frogs, snails and crabs, are diverse and designed with personality. En route to Aimee, Joel runs into a pair of survivors, Clyde (Michael Rooker) and eight-year-old Minnow (Ariana Greenblatt), who show the newbie the staying-alive ropes, a nice chemistry emerging between the trio (see Minnow’s teasing of Joel). If it takes its premise and plot cues from Zombieland__, Love And Monsters gets its spirit from Amblin without ever trying too hard to be too Amblin-y. It mixes laughs, a cute dog, PG-rated ickiness, exciting set-pieces, a genuinely warm robot and, as Joel is transfixed by a shoal of bioluminescent jellyfish floating through the air, a Spielbergian sense of wonder, perfectly juggling every colour.

As it enters its third act, it pivots into a slightly different movie that we are not really invested in, but the climactic Joel-versus-the-monsters showdown is satisfying. O’Brien makes for a likeable guide through the mayhem, playing a believable useless doofus at odds with his YA hero status. There’s some thematic guff about refusing to settle (even in a post-apocalyptic world) that never really lands, but Matthews and screenwriters Brian Duffieldand Matthew Robinson give the characters just enough time to breathe and register while never skimping on Humongous Bugs action. The ending leaves things open for a sequel. And for once, it would be very welcome.

Love And Monsters is a blast, an unassuming, immensely winning monster movie filled with great lo-fi creatures and a likeable cast. As a template for making a leaner, less bloated summer movie, Hollywood could do a lot worse.
Just so you know, we may receive a commission or other compensation from the links on this website - read why you should trust us