How to Make a Monster (2001 TV Movie) User Reviews (57)

I've Seen Better

[Theo Robertson · 5/10 · 17 August 2005]

I caught this on channel 4 very late , or very early considering how you think of 2.40 am and discovered that it was another Creature Feature movie production . I knew what to expect - Slightly corny and old fashioned B movie values but one that at the very least would be watchable , and I did enjoy the previous effort SHE CREATURE . After the credits rolled I did feel disappointed . HOW TO MAKE A MONSTER while not being a bad horror movie made for television it remains a ratherflawed one

The story suffers from a lack of originality and stereotypical characters . A trio of software designers are told there's a million dollars reward if they come up with the ultimate computer game . The trio are a funky black dude , an uber-geek and a sociopath . Since there's a danger of industrial espionage there's special security measures that causes a lock down on the software laboratories . Doesn't this sound contrived ? And I think you know where this is heading . So the trio , an intern and a company director find them selves trapped in a building in a plot that isn't a million miles removed from ALIEN , HARDWARE or THE LAWNMOWER MAN . Unforgivably it becomes very obvious early on who's going to die and who's going to survive meaning there's no surprises for the audience

Like most of the other movies by this company there is a comic book charm to the proceedings in that the gore doesn't overwhelm the story , I notice that several people have complained about the laughable make up and effects but surely this is done on purpose by the makers ? Despite having a TVM budget it's relatively well made , but would have been better if the script wasn't so predictable . As it stands if you're going to watch only one Creature Feature watch SHE CREATURE

How not to make a movie.

[Son_of_Mansfield · 3/10 · 18 May 2007]

Steven Culp portrays on of those money loving executives that would think Swimming with Sharks is a masterpiece of how to make it in the world. His opinion, that you have to knock other people out of the way to make it to the top and that making it to the top is the only reason to live, is also the thought of the movie. Since I disagree on both counts, the movie is not worth my time. Culp is good as the shark among guppies, but the high points end there. Clea DuVall and Jason Marsden are wasted in wussy roles while Tyler Mane is very tall and muscular. If you like girls with ungodly large breasts who aren't very attractive, Julie Strain obliges. To make matters worse, the f/x are laughable and the gore is blah. This is really only of interest to lovers of bad movies or people with warped world views.

A Good Metaphor of the Real Business Life Wasted in a Silly Screenplay

[claudio_carvalho · 5/10 · 30 April 2004]

Four web designers and a trainee are gathered in a computer company for a challenge: if they succeed in developing a scary game within a month, they will earn a bonus of US$ 1,000,000.00. The group does not have sense of teamwork and all of them are moved by greed only, generating an uncontrolled monster and being destroyed in the end. The trainee learns how to become a monster worst than the existing one, wins the prize and becomes a businesswoman. I believe the intention of the writer of this story was to create a metaphor of the real business life. The title `How to Make a Monster' has a double sense with the creature and the trainee. There are many messages between lines in some dialogs and situations. Unfortunately, although having reasonable special effects in the movie, the screenplay is very silly and is only recommended for killing time. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): `A Criação de um Monstro' (`The Creation of a Monster')

Oh...My...God...

[khoekstra · 31 March 2003]

Speaking as a game developer in real life, this was about the funniest movie I've ever seen! Here you have a Triple A title being developed by three guys (one sound guy, one AI guy and one weapons guy) along with a business manager and an intern. Bwahahahahaha... Oh my.

If you know anything about PC hardware, you'll get a really good laugh about their "mainframe" and the rest of their "high tech" equipment. Their server room is a huge closet right out of the 70s and it looks like a rack of video cards and Cat 5 cables hanging there in disarray. Oh, and I love the fact that their entire network and game assets can be backed up on a single CD-ROM that takes hours to run a restore with... Priceless.

This movie could have seriously, SERIOUSLY benefited from a technical advisor. I'm sure any self-respecting game developer would have been happy to consult in exchange for lunch with Julie Strain. Odd, too, that Julie has contacts at Ritual Entertainment, who developed FAKK 2. I'm sure they would have consulted just for kicks.

Silliness aside, this wasn't all bad. It's a cool concept... Julie Strain is still nice to look at. Clea Duvall does really well, considering what she has to work with. Tyler Mane was also very cool and there's some pretty good costuming, sets and gore as well.

This is no Citizen Kane, but it's an enjoyable way to spend an hour and a half if B movies are your thing. If you're an IT professional, you will absolutely LOVE this movie! But you'll see it as a comedy... This would be great entertainment at an IT professionals conference.

Samuel Z. Arkoff is turning over in his grave.

[curly-17 · 1/10 · 13 October 2001]

This movie is a remake of "How to Make a Monster" (1958). One of the producers is Lou Arkoff, son of Samuel Z. Arkoff. It has none of the charm, originality nor good writing of the original. Ed Wood had written a script, back around 1955, for his good friend Bela Lugosi-- Bela was to have portrayed a makeup artist who makes real life monsters. It was eventually turned into an AIP movie. In 2001, AIP was making remakes of 10 of their old movies. This remake turns the monster into a video game, and the film seems to appeal to computer gamers only. The movie is dedicated to the memory of Samuel Z. Arkoff and James H. Nicholson, founding fathers of AIP-- it is not a fitting tribute. My advice: watch the 1958 original, and skip this turkey.

my god, what you think you are doing?

[mr_facehead · 1/10 · 4 July 2005]

that was unbelievable!

i was shocked at how bad this film was

i wish i could burn it, and everything that has anything to do with it.

i laughed once, when that guy beat up the monster thing, and that wasn't supposed to be funny.

if you have just bought this film, and haven't watched it yet... ... ha ha you are unlucky to stumble across this, i will give you some advice, don't even bother watching this film.

if anyone says this is good, please, don't believe them, because they may be trying to trick you, or they may have fell asleep half way through.

the kind of film you would even be annoyed if you bought it for 50p.

Terrible, How could Clea Duvall every agree to this?

[jennyann1975 · 1/10 · 6 July 2005]

I am a huge fan of B movies but this was absolutely terrible. I only rented it because I think Clea Duvall is a great actress. I think the movie is trying to make a point but the only one I got was that you need to be utterly ruthless to make it in the gaming world!?! ***SPOILER ALERT*** Basic plot is three game programmers, a manager, and an intern are locked in an office building with some electronic suit that comes to life because of electricity. It proceeds to kill everyone but the intern who all of a sudden develops sword fighting skills and kills the monster. Clea Duvall is the intern who starts out as a nice girl with an abusive boyfriend. But for some odd reason she turns into a money hungry software company boss. I think there is a plot somewhere but I got distracted by a wrestler trying to act like a computer geek. Anyway, the movie is a complete waste of time and even Clea Duvall's great acting can't save the movie. Oh and someone needs to tell Julie Strain she doesn't look good topless anymore.

Terrible. Just terrible.

[tom-1712 · 1/10 · 13 December 2008]

This is one of the most terrible movies I have ever seen. Even for a TV-movie, it's bad. After throwing all shreds of realism out of the window (3 programmers creating a game in a matter of weeks?), they have a few short action sequences before bringing the movie to a close. It felt like some scenes has been cut out of the movie, as Laura immediately going back on her decision was unlikely, to say the least. Horrible acting, bad video game sequences (it felt like Doom or Quake by the graphics and gameplay, which was probably the idea), and a fundamentally flawed idea made this go from a bad movie to a terrible movie very quickly.

I wouldn't recommend it, in fact, I'd recommend just about anything else if you were to choose.

Wow, this is awful!

[raypdaley182 · 1/10 · 26 November 2006]

When a slight bit of nudity is the highlight of a whole film, you know it's dire.

I recognised Jason Marsden from Eerie, Indiana (and yes, he still looked like Dash X) and Julie Strain before anyone even introduced her. I recognised Clea Duvall's Boyfriend from "That 70's Show" and I figured that I'd seen Hardcore possibly as a wrestler - he was Big Sky in WCW and also Sabretooth in X-men.

The film was incredibly predictable (apart from who'd stolen the back-up disk) and it was pretty obvious Clea Duvall was going to survive.

One thing I wasn't sure of, whose head she'd seen when she was thrown down the hole (I assume it was her boyfriend or Hardcore?).

Fun B-movie for video game geeks

[Leofwine_draca · 6/10 · 3 August 2016]

After sitting through four of these distinctly lacklustre 'Creature Feature' movie remakes that were made for television back in 2001, it pained me to watch the last, HOW TO MAKE A MONSTER. Each film has an interesting premise and plenty of potential, but these elements were usually wasted in favour of the mundane. HOW TO MAKE A MONSTER isn't a perfect film by any means but the key difference is that it's actually entertaining for once. From the word go, the story of computer nerds accidentally bringing a monster to life is a lot of fun, with plenty of larger-than-life characters and humour to keep things amusing; I went through a video game stage myself as a teenager (and have probably never really grown out of it) so much of the on-screen antics are also appealing.

Ironically, the first half, which is as usual the set-up, is the most interesting, before the second turns into a traditional monster-on-the-rampage flick. The low budget is evident in the use of one single set and the lack of any CGI effects, but the monster itself is a fantastic-looking beast that manages to scare. It assimilates body parts in a similar way to the Jamie Lee Curtis-starrer VIRUS and looks horrendous, which is the point. I loved the sword-and-sorcery edge the film has to it with the use of swords and axes rather than the weaponry which the usual clichéd soldiers-vs-aliens flicks have. The climax plays out as you might imagine, with a moral epilogue of a twist as well, and I sat through it all and found it amiable enough.

The cast is fairly interesting and wide-reaching for what is, in essence, a B-movie. Clea Duvall, who I found intensely irritating in the likes of THE FACULTY, is actually passable here; Steven Culp is the established actor of the piece but makes little impact. The three guys playing the nerds are having a lot of fun and are all fine in their parts, with particular note going to Tyler Mane, he of the massive build; Mane later went on to play the hulking hero Ajax in TROY and Michael Myers in Rob Zombie's HALLOWEEN remake. There's also a topless cameo from scream queen Julie Strain, which is the closest this film gets to modern-day B-movies. It's no masterpiece, but I think it achieves what it set out to achieve, which was to create a B-movie for our times with similarities to '50s flicks with added here-and-now updates.

"You have to be mean if you want to make green." Awful horror film.

[poolandrews · 2/10 · 17 August 2005]

How to Make a Monster starts with Faye Clayton (producer Colleen Camp) firing her team of software programmer's when the latest game called 'Evilution' that they are working on receives disastrous test previews & the search is on for a new team. This is where Peter Drummond (Steven Culp), Bug (Jason Marsden), Hardcore (Tyler Mane) & the obligatory black guy Sol (Karim prince) step in & take over. The brief is they need to turn 'Evilution' into a really scary game in one month, if they succeed they will earn a $1 million bonus, Clayton also gives them intern Laura Wheeler (Clea DuVall) as a general dogsbody. How to Make a Monster then cuts to 'Three Weeks Later' as the game nears completion, Hardcore has designed the weapons & monsters, Bug has developed the music & sound effects & Sol has programed a new form of artificial intelligence while Peter does what bosses do. One night a lightning strike causes a power overload which in turn makes a motion capture suit come to life & start acting out 'Evilution' as if it were real. Peter, Laura, Sol, Bug & Hardcore all become targets of the killer game & it's robotic suit...

Written & directed by George Huang I personally thought How to Make a Monster was a very poor attempt at horror. The script has no relation to the original How to Make a Monster (1958) apart form it's title, there are so many things fundamentally wrong with this film it's untrue. The whole concept sucks & Huang obviously doesn't know anything about technology as How to Make a Monster has no factual basis or notion of reality at all, motion capture suits coming to life? How can it walk & operate before it kills Sol? How can the mainframe computer control it with no visible wires? Radio control, I don't think so. Only three people to program one game? These days it takes dozens of talented programmer's to develop a good game & a hell of a lot longer than a month. I could go on, but I won't. The title How to make a Monster refers to the films hidden meaning, the moral message if you will. You see How to Make a Monster is all about people turning into monsters because of greed, jealousy & ambition. I bet Huang thought he was really clever coming up with that double meaning title. The characters are uniformly unlikable & clichéd, Sol & Bug in particular are highly irritating to endure. Technically How to Make a Monster isn't too bad considering it's TV limitations, director Huang fails to create any sort of tension or atmosphere which is what a good horror film is all about. The kills are all off screen & have no build up whatsoever, when at the end it finally looks as if we might get a decent sequence involving the monster the film keeps cutting to awful in game computer footage, maybe to save money? It breaks up & dilutes any sort of excitement the climatic fight might had, very poor. There are a few computer game/film references, an Evil Dead video game poster keeps turning up in the background, a Tales From the Crypt pinball machine & a scene where the monster rips someones head off complete with dangling spinal cord which obviously is meant to pay homage to Mortal Kombat & it's infamous gory 'Fatalities'. As a whole the violence is restrained with the aforementioned head & spinal cord ripping, another severed head & a cut off hand. The monster itself as it adds bits of human bodies to itself looks pretty cool but is barely used, it's past the 40 minute mark before it does anything. The acting is poor from all involved & watch out for actress Julie Strain who complains about having to go nude, again considering her other work I suppose director Huang thought this would be a funny in joke of some sort. It isn't. Overall there really isn't anything by which I can recommend How to Make a Monster & in actual fact I think it should be retitled to How to Make a Monstrosity of a Film. One to avoid.

Great, Great Sci-Fi flick!

[KolobosRexx · 10/10 · 13 October 2001]

I saw this on Cinemax last night, and LOVED it! It's the story of a computer game company which hires three maverick programmers to finish and enhance the "Evilution" game. However, Sol(the guy who develops the game's A.I) fills it with virtually every evil he could download, and a power-surge brings the program to life, causing it to construct a cybernetic-zombie body, and seek to kill the programmers, the intern, and the project boss! A very interesting and well-done sci-fi flick, with a clever script, cool effects, and good acting for a made-for-cable film! The characters are flawed but likeable, especially Tyler Mane, as "Hardcore", who is hysterical! The film also has interesting philosophical points to make regarding greed, competition, and what it takes to survive and succeed in the computer industry, and what the definition of a true "monster" is... better than a lot of theatrical attempts at sci-fi I've seen the last year or so. Five out of five stars! :)

A unique, entertaining flick

[mauricej74 · 7/10 · 10 April 2003]

Well I consider myself a bit of a movie buff... My favorite flicks are Taxi Driver, Apocolypse Now and other hardcore dramas. I just stumbled upon this movie on HBO and I couldn't stop watching it! In my opinion, any movie that lets you forget about the real world for an hour or so is a great movie. If you're a computer geek you'll probably be chomping at the bit to nick-pick it but many of us watch movies to be entertained, and I have to say this movie was GREAT, imo. Something very different (and funny), and entertaining! I would buy this DVD. I especially enjoyed the performances of the three programmers, and the hottie intern.

So so 're-imagining'

[JohnSeal · 4/10 · 13 October 2001]

It doesn't really bear any relationship to the original (fun) AIP film, but it does share some of the campy humour of its progenitor. Sadly this straight to cable effort, the second in Creature Features overhauls, is not as good as their take on She Creature. The film starts out promisingly and has a decent cast headed by the always good Clea Duvall and the fun Tyler (X-Men) Mane. Unfortunately it runs out of inspiration after the first half hour and devolves into another slash and burn affair with poor special effects and a paper thin (and dull) tale of mortals being chased through a locked building. By the time the film delivers its heavy message at the end you'll have lost patience. Coming from the director of the acerbic Swimming With Sharks, this is a bit of a let down.

I LOVED IT!

[millerman1893 · 6 November 2004]

Wow, I was brought back in time with this movie. It reminded me of so many early computer games. It had so many great parts played by some better than B-movie actors. Hardcore was hilarious and Bug was the perfect nerd. There were a few video game references in Bug's music and voice clips like "Fresh Meat" and "Come Get Some" that reminded me of some games I played back in Junior High. It's a little bit nostalgia and a little bit action. I guess you could say it had a good underlying message, which you'll see in the end... pretty predictable though. I also loved the Evil Dead poster on the wall... good "nerd" movie, and I can personally vouch for that. This movie is definitely worth seeing... for the acting AND the story.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!

[Cin-38 · 1/10 · 17 May 2002]

I hate to sound critical or anything. BUT! There are way too many glowing reviews for this film. People acually seem to think this is as scary as Suspiria. Anyone who actually seeks enjoyment from this film outside of a so-bad-its-good-attitude is a cinematic masochist. Anyone who finds this movie scary has emotional problems.

Are we so deprived of good horror movies (or bad ones for that matter) that we have to accept this as scary? SCARY? The acting was scary and that's about it.

I think we should crucify Tyler Mane. Hardcore? A computer geek named hardcore? Something wrong here? I mean we all the other stereo-types to make a good crappy horror movie, why did they put him in there? Did anyone try to act in this film? Even Clea DuVall (whom I enjoy very much) seemed to meander through the scenes reading her lines with all the zeil and emotion of a UPS truck.

Another problem I have with the reviews of this movie is everybody seems to think it's so original. ORIGINAL? I'm sorry to insult your IQ (actually I'm not) but exactly how many machine-built-for-good-turns-evil-kills-everything-computer-withamindofitsow n movies have there been?

The real flaw in this movie is that it takes itself too seriously. The director really thought he was making another Alien. Hence the "claustrophobic" environment. Monster creature running around a small area hiding and killing obnoxious crew members one-by-one seems to be the real theme. Problem, Alien was original in its time. Also, it had good writing, good acting, and characters to care about.

But back to the taking itself too seriously part. Besides a few pre-monster shenadigans by the nerds, the film plays it straight. Bad move. Really there is nothing to take seriously about this movie.

What's scary about bad writing, sloppy direction, wooden acting, and a plot that's been worn out since the 80's? Absolutely nothing. Unless you have a need to watch a movie you need to make fun of all the through.

A Poor Effort

[MK25 · 3/10 · 8 December 2001]

This is just a bad low-budget would-be horror film. I felt sorry for Clea Duvall and the others involved. Lame predictable plot. Laughable when it tries to get serious with its morale at the end. If you liked this you'll love Hardware (1990) with Dylan McDermott fighting a similar looking cyborg monster.

god awful

[anthromayer · 2/10 · 10 November 2002]

Okay this movie has a big major flaw. The term overlord cannot be used when refering to a an EVIL creature from hell. I believe the correct term would be underlord. Maybe when they fix the name of the evil machine they can start to work on the awful plot line.

Bottom 30 Worst Scripts Ever

[olspazzy · 1/10 · 11 July 2003]

The message of this movie is to destroy anyone in the way of your greed. The main character is unclear throughout (are the programmers the most important in the script? Is it the boss? Maybe the intern? All of them??), then suddenly at the end you find out the whole story is about only one of them.

Worse yet, that character goes from a GOOD character in the start of the film, to totally pathetic. A reverse transformation.

Despite the terrible acting, laughable story concept, and disgusting message of the writer's script, somehow, unbelievably, the plot, dialogue, and character development manage to suck even more than everything else in this downright pitiful made-for-TV trash.

Well, then again, if you enjoy movies that completely cliche the business industry and utterly skewer the truth of video game development, then hey, you're in for a joyride of totally misinformed, brainless delight!

But for the logical-thinkers, don't waste your time; keep flipping through the other HBO channels and choose something that would get at least a 2/10 rating; or better yet, just turn off the TV.

Personally, I find it horrifying that 37 people gave this movie a perfect score.

Just awful

[yojimbo999 · 1/10 · 11 May 2003]

Bad, bad, bad, bad movie. George Huang seems confused about what type of movie he's doing. The first half is all fun and games, with over-the-top performances and silly banter. The second half turns oddly violent, with people getting beheaded and skewered. Then, to top it off, Huang throws in a theme of "people are evil" at the end. I don't get it: what am I watching here? Oh, I get it. It's a MESS.

A pleasant surprise, "Programmed For Damage!"

[hippiedj · 7/10 · 7 June 2003]

At a glance this film may seem just a time-filler, but to be fair....

While not fresh in originality, How To Make A Monster is a nice diversion from the crop of films out there recently that seem to depend on star power and rock tunes to carry them. This entry in the Creature Features series seems to be what Full Moon was trying to attempt in its hey day if it only had the slightly bigger budget.

Basically, several computer game programmers with clashing egos are hired to expedite the release of a new game called Evilution. In the process, a power surge and system overload bring a motion suit to life and the computer then is literally playing the game out with the programmers and office staff, and it's kill or be killed with everyone trapped inside the building.

There's a fair amount of suspense, a few twists, and a lot to say about greed, arrogance, and the lessening value of being just plain nice. The special effects mainly consist of the creature, and all else is done rather modestly which helps keep the story on track instead of being bogged down with massive digital effects. The only sad thing is that this film seems to say that in the end, it's dog eat dog and you might as well forget about trying to be nice to anyone. The title of the film aptly applies to the transformation of Clea DuVall's character as well in the final scene.

Everyone plays their attitudes to the hilt (to quite an annoying level at times), and some may be put off by the excessive language but things move along rather swiftly so you don't dwell on that too long. I was hesitant at first to view this because I was concerned that it was going to be a Julie Strain "breast fest" (as if she's not getting enough exposure being married to the editor of Heavy Metal Magazine, or should I just call it Heavy Strain Magazine?), but her appearance was minimal. And yes, her "big guns" made the required appearance to satisfy those who just have to see them. That part was not as gratuitous as one would think, and even the violence is just enough without getting ridiculously over the top. Overall, it's a satisfying experience and entertains as intended which is a good feat when you consider how so many bigger Hollywood productions that actually got theatrical release first seem so empty and aren't worth the purchase price on DVD.

I'm not a video game fanatic and don't know much about computers, but you don't have to be a whiz to be entertained by the subject matter in How To Make A Monster. While not a masterpiece, it's a fun ride and one of the better bets in the sci-fi/horror genre lately on home video. Not a cerebral experience like SESSION 9 or DONNIE DARKO, not as serious as BELOW, but something you can sit back with a ton of junk food and enjoy.

pretty bad movie

[miguelsanchez69 · 2/10 · 3 April 2003]

Despite decent acting this movie is pretty worthless. if you know anything about computers you'll laugh yourself silly as the makers of the film obviously don't. But, besides the nitpicking the script is just terrible (theres a scene that just consists of the characters realizing their predicament and uttering an expletive - the same expletive no less for about 5 minutes) and the ending is muddled and morally sententious. Not gory enough for gorehounds, not campy enough for b-movie fiends and in general just too boring for everyone else. A decent concept is wasted in the process.

Wow what an excellent sci-fi scary movie

[cleaduvallisababe · 10/10 · 17 January 2002]

I saw this movie last week and was totally blown away by how good it was. I wonder why it didn't get a cinema release. I live in the UK and find it a task to get hold of some movies so it was a bonus to see this. Clea Duvall who happens to be my fave actress was great in this, her character was so convincing. I rate this a perfect 10 out of 10 go get it..

How To Make a Monster

[Scarecrow-88 · 6/10 · 9 June 2008]

Creating the scariest game comes with a price..and we witness this when a group are put to work on "touching up" a video game which doesn't scare or thrill children who play it. Evilution, where skeletal armored creatures do battle, is supposed to go to market soon and it's up to Drummond(Steven Culp)to get the right associates on board to fix the numerous problems keeping the game from truly adhering to the addictive requirements associated with kids and their parents' dollars. Intern Laura(Clea DuVall), a naive, meek, sweet-natured chick who sees the world through rose-colored glasses, interviews three programming geniuses, all with their various short-comings..Hardcore(..the hulking Tyler Mane)a bit too intense/intimidating with an extensive knowledge of weaponry for "battle games", Sol(Karim Prince), a narcissist who loves the sound of his voice and enjoys informing others of how brilliant he is, and acne-faced, speed-speaking, stuttering nerd Bug(Jason Marsden)who is a whiz at producing sound effects. With a promise of a bonus(1 million dollars) to any of the assigned group who can create this game on time for market, the war begins with each individual often at odds with each other. But, their competitive nature will indeed be tested when an electrical current "brings to life"(..Bug has an explanation, but it's in "geek-speak", so I won't bother elaborating extensively)a telemetry suit used by actors for the game characters. The computer is controlling the suit, and the computer is playing the game so the cast are being targeted as if they were characters in the game. The suit actually uses body parts from a few of the victims to form a hybrid and those left try to escape the best they can throughout the well-secure building..but, thanks to Bug's mishap, the doors are slammed shut with limited means(..crawlspaces)of retreat as the creature hunts for them. Along the way, Laura learns a lesson on greed and the evils of the world. A twist yields a surprise regarding the back up disc, the remaining members are seeking, which contains the entire game.

Yes, this is as wacky as the premise sounds, but if you can somehow look past this there's some fun to be had here. I thought the cast did what they could under the circumstances, playing it as straight as they possibly could. Still, the film has a grim view of human nature, leaving us with a transformation of Laura when it's all said and done that's kind of a bummer. There's some truth to her logic regarding the dog-eat-dog world we live in, that she learns from her boss, Drummond. The monster suit is a wild concoction of metal, wires, and body parts. Not overly gory, but some heads are removed and blood splatter. The computer effects are rather underwhelming. I think the casting of DuVall succeeds..she's the normal eyes of what is transpiring, but her battle with the creature at the end is hard to take serious, even if you cut your brain off. Food for thought..perhaps the title has a two fold meeting regarding Laura's metamorphosis?

Whomever wrote this obviously did so with a typewriter...

[mentalcritic · 1/10 · 20 November 2004]

...because it becomes obvious in a big hurry that they have never used a computer in their life. The cast assembled to play the programmers is funny enough, but what really gets this viewer laughing is how much arguing goes on about various aspects of the game they are programming. Or the deadline set by the money men. A team of three programmers will not be able to code a complete game, especially not one with all the advanced routines talked about, in a mere four weeks. If you have any doubts about this, check out the list of people responsible for putting together Doom, at the time of release considered the most advanced video game ever made. It took a lot longer than four weeks for that dozen-plus crew.

By far the most amusing part of the film is the scene with Julie Strain in a so-called motion capture suit. Anyone who has seen the spandex monstrosity that Andy Serkis wore during photography for The Two Towers will recognise this scene as utterly ridiculous. That Strain (the one depicted in the film) would not see this for the idiotic hustle that it is defies credibility. I find it difficult to believe that the other actors didn't read this script and absolutely balk at it.

There is also a reason that most films do not depict things involving a computer without fictionalising it. If one watches what the user does for any length of time, it becomes boring in a big hurry. The problem here is that none of the sequences filmed in order to compensate for this have been thought through. When Clea DuVall is sitting before a computer with VR goggles, trying to fight the game's monster, the number of times she takes them off and puts them back on again is ridiculous. Given that there is no connection between any of the computers and the ridiculous flesh-machine construct, exactly how this solution is meant to work defies belief. You can claim infra-red wireless networking until you are blue in the face. It wasn't in common usage even in 2001, and as anyone who has tried to use it can tell you, calling Wi-Fi networking unreliable is like calling Ed Wood slightly incompetent.

Given that the cast includes such B-level stars as Clea Duvall and Tyler Mane, I think the fault for the stupidity of this piece lies entirely with the screenwriters. The cardinal sin anyone can commit when writing a story that involves computers as a central basis for the plot is to overestimate the capabilities of the modern CPU. Giving the computer the ability to learn tactical points would require more storage space, and processing power, than even the most modern supercomputers are able to muster. Every single observation from experience would have to be stored as a programming note, and most home CPUs would turn into a steaming pool of goo trying to look them up.

Not to mention that it seems a modern malady that programmers mistake "more enjoyable" for meaning "more difficult". There gets to be a point where you can only do the same thing in a game so many times over before you want to rip the disc out and hit it with a hammer. The modern law, as I put it to game programmers, is that if you have a choice between making a shorter game or making one that feels impossible to win, make the shorter game. The scenes at the beginning with the children telling us how much this game sucks could really apply to any video game made in the past ten years, with few spectacular exceptions (Resident Evil comes to mind).

I gave How To Make A Monster a one out of ten. The reasons for this are numerous. It is poorly-researched, poorly-written, and poorly made. Mystery Science Theatre 3000 would have a field day with this turkey. When the highlight of a film is Julie Strain jumping up and down, well, I don't think I need to say more.