5 Reasons Your Monsters Suck (Writing Advice)

[@EliasModeMusic]

They missed an opportunity to defeat Pennywise by making each character overcome their fear and show courage in their own way.

[@MelchVagquest]

I like where your head is at, but I think the point was that they were all stronger together and they gave each other courage

[@andrewmclellan1623]

​@@MelchVagquestAgree that this was great in theory but bad in execution. The Drinker mentioned that it would have been excellent if each character had to overcome a childhood trauma as Bill did

[@kryptonianguest1903]

Iirc, It is one of the books where Steven King took a whole lot of substances and woke up a week later with a manuscript in front of him.

[@Some_guy09]

I hate it when they show the monster too much, especially in broad daylight. Less is more in that area.

[@MumRah]

I disagree. Admiral Hodo was plenty scary and well lit the whole time. 😂

[@MrPleers]

Indeed. Jaws is a good example how it's done right. The shark is in the movie for 10 minutes or so. But the suspense....

[@janiefallout8]

I think they did it by accident. The shark often malfunctioned so they decided not to show it too much.

[@MumRah]

@@janiefallout8 that's exactly why they didn't show it in the beginning

[@Some_guy09]

The original xenomorph in Alien is another good example. The imagination fills in the blanks while preserving the mystery and fear of the unknown.

[@Ghost_Text]

The struggle between a well written monster and protagonist is a tug of war between who can best leverage the environment. It conceals the monster to build up their mystique and facilitates their shock and awe moment but it also tells the story of their weakness to an highly aware protagonist

[@Redeye308350]

The roaring dinosaur effect. When a monster is chasing you with intent to eat you, it gets within range then stops to roar and be intimidating. Real predatory animals dont do that, they go straight for the kill. Rather than giving the prey time to escape.

[@taragnor]

Yeah, generally animals roar and be intimidating when they're acting territorial, so they want to look strong to scare you off. That being said though, predators don't always go immediately for the kill. They do often stalk prey, especially newer prey that they're not sure if it's dangerous or not. Black bear encounters for instance often involves a bear following someone, sizing them up and even doing things like fake charges to see how the person responds. It's not simply a rush to immediately kill. At least unless you turn and run, then it usually decides you're prey and commits to an attack.

[@glentz716]

"When you have to shoot, shoot - don't talk"

[@ericpeckham5709]

lIKE A DOG BARKING. iF IT'S BARKING, YOU'VE GOT TIME TO GET AWAY. iF IT WANTS TO ATTACK, IT WILL DO SO SILENTLY.

[@ronaldbell7429]

Paleontologists now believe that dinosaurs can't eat an animal until that animal has soiled itself. Thus the need to roar right before the final attack.

[@dawnkravagna3200]

Happens a lot in murder mysteries too. The villain almost never just tries to finish off the protagonist. They stop and give a confession which gives the protagonist a chance to kill or stop them or make an arrest.

[@SteveShahbazian]

Hi Brandon, cool video. I'd add a mistake: showing too much of the monster too soon. Alien, The Terminator and Predator all created some of the most memorable monsters in the movie history by concealing their true appearance until the end.

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Yep, can definitely help if you have more to reveal later on

[@alpha_wolf_lover4105]

@@WriterBrandonMcNulty Just a question working on my own book is it a good idea to have perspective of both good guy and bad guy and make them villains in each of the stories. Like character A sees him self as good while he sees character b as the villain. And vis versa. Is this a good idea and if you know any stories like it let me know plz.

[@Valkanna.Nublet]

One underrated example I like is The Relic and how it slowly ramps things up. First it's not even a monster movie, just some gruesome murder mystery. Then when the reveal of a monster happens it still hints and glimpses. We only get to see it in its full glory near the end when it hits the big action scene.

[@Persewna4]

I agree, The Terminator did such a good job by holding back until the end to show the true nature of the robot. I still remember that scene and it's been a good decade or two since I've watched the film, I can remember feeling terrified, not just for the characters, but of the monster itself, which is what you want from a good monster.

[@251TheMechanizedSingfantry]

Imagination is scariest thing of all

[@solhelian91]

The flip side of the Silly Weakness mistake is the Unearned Resurrection. I hate it how Freddy Krueger and Michael Meyers can keep coming back for endless sequels because writers decide after the fact and without justification that the injuries they sustained in previous movies weren't enough to finish them. This undermines the accomplishments of the heroes in the previous movies. Prime example is Nightmare on Elm Street 4. In the previous film, Freddy Krueger was utterly vanquished when his burial site was sanctified with holy water, but to resurrect him a dog simply comes along and desanctifies it again by peeing on it. OK, so holy water is invested with the power of god and can crush demons, but is no match for dog urine?

[@EH23831]

Well, it burns your lawn, soooo…😂

[@IbilisSLZ]

Somehow Freddy Krueger returned.

[@ganzgrosseskino]

To be fair: It is probably the executives who decide that the characters are gonna come back and now the writers have to roll with it.

[@Disgruntled_Grunt]

I mean, if it was cat urine I could understand.

[@marcbauerett1232]

This list (especially #5) reminded me just how formidable Terminator 1+2 are. The fights at the end were extremely hard and the victory felt earned.

[@seankrolyk5814]

30+ years later and theres only ONE action movie that is on par with T2.

[@errantwinds-up8uu]

One thing I actually love, generally when writing a multi-book project, is when the fear of the unknown turns out to be a misunderstanding. You can't overdo it of course, but sometimes realising that the thing coming after you didn't know any better, or thought your "group" was horrible for some reason, can be a great plot twist.

[@evanczthehunter57]

Fair point, I'm in a pre planning phase of a story in a fictional world where dragons have never been seen before, and thus when the big bad first shows up, everyone there is completely blindsided.

[@clayless8701]

@@evanczthehunter57 that sounds like it's going to be a peak villain entrance

[@ceedee873]

​​​@@evanczthehunter57 That actually sounds very interesting, you don't see that kind of plotline often. Reminds me of how zombies in The Walking Dead are a foreign a concept to society within that particular universe, and thus the people in that world are blindsided at first as well. Good luck and best wishes for your story, I hope to read it someday.

[@teddyhaines6613]

If a monster is intelligent, it should probably be wary of potential ambushes if it's lost sight of the protagonists for a long enough time. In general, intelligent monsters should be wondering about what their targets are doing as much as the other way around.

[@AlmostEthical]

Arguably the most egregious mistake in modern movie history was the biologist in Prometheus reaching out to pet a vicious-looking alien, with predictable results. A classic #1, Idiot Victim. People can hardly remember what the monster was like, distracted by the sheer stupidity of the scene.

[@Disgruntled_Grunt]

The real monsters were the idiots who died along the way? But in all seriousness, I consider Idiocracy a horror film because it showcases the destructive potential of stupid people.

[@SillyWillyFan47]

I heard there was a cut scene in Prometheus had the geologist & biologist getting high together (dope) and that is what led the biologist to be over-confident with the snake-like alien. Without the scene the biologist's behavior didn't make sense anymore.

[@AlmostEthical]

@@SillyWillyFan47 He did act as though he was high in that scene. Would rather the astronauts be logical but are simply overpowered or cunningly ambushed

[@ravneiv]

This channel could run on Prometheus videos for a year

[@nont18411]

The monster looks like a vagina snake

[@zachwest2387]

I know it's a family movie, but the ending to Rise of the Guardians is a good example of overcoming fear to beat the monster. The snowball is a natural and realistic way to cut through the fear. Then you have the comeback of the nightmares only to find out that Pitch feared his own tenuous hold on them. It helps that the villain doesn't feed on fear, but uses those that do.

[@leyenda6149]

Every time I hear Brandon start off by saying "Get ready!", I thinkbof the opening of the old Space Harrier video arcade game from when I was a wee lad

[@Ironica82]

Not sure if it relates to monsters or villains in general but when, in the middle of the movie, the villain knows exactly where the hero is hiding or can easily defeat them and then just decides to let them live for a poor reasons.

[@sarahsander785]

Or because plot. I love Digimon, especially the very first series. Epecially Vamdeemon, whom I still hold in regard as one of the best villains of all time (especially for a kid's show). But his death is so obviously because of plot. He had several (!) opportunities to erase all danger for himself. Some he missed because of world or character reasons (not killing Tailmon, not killing all the children. That's okay and totally in line with the series). But then around the end of his arc, he start's not even making stupid decisions, but the writers are like "Nah, let him be the baddie, but his acts won'T have consequences anymore". Which leads to a crucial survival by a helper character (who realisticly has to be dead at that point, given all we know about the world and Vamdeemon's powers), who then convinently gets found by the heroes and is there to secrifice himself to rescue the kid, who becomes the tamer of the digimon to defeat Vamdeemon (TWICE). I mean, I do love the sacrifice scene. I even love Vamdeemon's death scene. But the lead up to it is so poorly done, it irritates me greatly. And it's a mistake I encounter far too often (especially in horror movies, where it's less excusable than in a kid's show).

[@Ironica82]

@@sarahsander785 Man, I haven't watched that show in decades. Ya making me want to watch it again so I remember all that detail that you just described (all I remember from the finale is the one Digimon finally evolving into an angel).. TBH, while I was typing my reply, I was wondering to myself if Perfect Cell from DBZ would fit it or did they give a good explanation on why he kept them alive.

[@GoeTeeks]

The "I'll finish you off later" trope.

[@Ironica82]

@@GoeTeeks Have you seen the Cell Saga of DBZ? If so, do you think they gave him a good reason to wait?

[@GoeTeeks]

@@Ironica82 Probably not. Trunks said it was to give people fear but... he didn't have to give ten days to do that.

[@JackKirbyFan]

I love your videos. You never overstay your welcome and provide clear concise information - even to those who have no desire to write for a living :)

[@TurquoiseStar17]

A game has one of my favorite examples of a monster with limited backstory, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask. You learn almost nothing about the titular being except that it's an ancient and chaotic evil, despite its influence literally staring you down the whole game in the form of the the moon. It made the atmosphere more unsettling when you finally fight Majora and see its erratic behavior.

[@MatthewBouyack]

I love the moment in the final boss fight when the Mask drops the skull kid and you realize that the mask itself is the real monster!

[@siegfriedmordrake3229]

The face on the moon gave me chills when I was a kid

[@brightsideofmaths]

Yeah, Majora's Mask has such a crazily effective doomsday atmosphere throughout the game without even showing you the villain behind it.

[@Some_guy09]

As a fan of Zelda for the last 25+ years, I hope to never see the Zelda team revisit Termina or Majora’s Mask for any reason. It is superb the way it is, and any attempts to give more backstory would likely undermine Majora’s Mask as a game.

[@AnUndivine]

This checklist reminds my of how the predator in the original Predator movie was well done. When Arnie found it's weakness, it adapted. It was never overexplained, even as you learned more about it. It was always deadly, even when facing the main protagonist, who barely made it out alive.

[@grayscales1864]

It drives me nuts when the monster is indiscriminately slashing everyone and everything in it path, but as soon as it gets close to the main characters, it gets super slow, sniffing around slowly and making that clicking growling sound effect, and as soon as they are almost close enough to touch the main character (but can't smell them or hear a heartbeat or feel their heat or sense them in any way) they get distracted by some other sound and then go tear that thing to shreds instead

[@mohammadtausifrafi8277]

Because Hollywood is generally dumb, and it expects the audience to be dumb as well. So that is how it creates "tension".

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

What monster mistake do you hate most? Let us know!

[@Valkanna.Nublet]

You hit my main issue in the video: inconsistencies. Whether it's damage dealt, damage taken, or skills, there needs to be some consistency and not just doing whatever the plot requires at that moment (doing just what the plot requires is a big problem for me in almost all aspects of a story) By the way, you really should pin these questions.

[@kevingluys3063]

Something I dislike is actually when a movie doesn't show enough of the monster and horrors. I feel like I've seen more forgettable movies that lean too far into "don't show the monster" than I've seen ones that show too much. A horror movie that shows too much is still fun, but a horror movie that shows too little is boring. My favorite horror movies are Hellraiser, Insidious, The Grudge, and Th13teen Ghosts. They are all movies that show and tell a lot about their horror and would suck if they didn't.

[@machalot]

The hive mind death or kill the queen trope. An entire army of invincible bads is defeated by killing the one central monster. This appears in GoT with the Night King, appears in Edge of Tomorrow as almost the only weak point of the movie, and appears in Battle: Los Angeles to some extent. It's used more effectively in Independence Day because the heroes use the alien mothership as a network hub to distribute a computer virus that makes the others vulnerable instead of instakilling them.

[@cherry_buzzsaw]

A good support to understanding monster's power is tabletop role playing games. It's much more easy to deal same amount of damage when you get statblock. Also monsters in d&d like games almost always has limits of usage for it's most powerful abilities. And when you regulary play this games, you constructing a special mindset. So it helps a lot. Excluding another profits and fun!😅

[@gustavopimpao7823]

6:39 when watching alien movies I always understood that the acid blood is more corrosive against non organic structures that against human body. Sure, it will still damage the people a lot, but no so much that will make a gigantic hole on them.

[@MrPleers]

I wonder what the aliens in Signs were thinking. "Water is like acid to us. Lets go to a planet that is covered for 1/3 with that stuff. What could possible go wrong ? "

[@jesusromanpadro3853]

I think that they are like swarming locus, moving from planet to planet, taking everything. They probably have to sleep for years, or more, between planets. Is the only way it can be justified that they attract a planet with water. But there is no hint about this.

[@ikmor]

And it's in every molecule of air.

[@taragnor]

The movie only really makes sense if you imagine the aliens were on a diplomatic mission trying to establish peaceful relations. It's the only reason they'd show up naked and unarmed.

[@grondhero]

@@taragnor Could be naked because they wanted to do some "anal probing." 🤯

[@DavidLewis-v4m]

And it's essential for all lifeforms. They couldn't dissolve in water unless they were made of things that dissolve in water, which would mean they'd have to be made of mostly water. Just an insanely stupid weakness.

[@Stiksta]

Personally I hate it when a monster just doesn't have a good motive. Like when they try to make "an animal" the monster, and it wants to eat sure... But after eating 90 percent of the cast shouldn't it kinda like be full by now? Resting to conserve energy? It gets to the point where it's just still chasing just for plot and not for any realistic reason. Tremors, Jurassic Park, etc. Bad examples of it. Them grabloids and spineosaur got stuffed and still keep going. Meanwhile monsters done right was like that one scene in peter jacksons king king with the bugs. You meet them, and they get their fill and the surviving characters move on. Or how the ones in Attack on Titan have an in lore reason to eat nonstop and are shown puking the half digested globs of whatever is left by the time their stomachs get full. Which just added to their horror.

[@jesusromanpadro3853]

At least the monster dinosaur in Jurassic World was just killing everything on his way, not just to eat.

[@torytellstales]

Camp Cretacous had this one moment that drove me crazy in the second season...... So the main characters were being hunted by a hippo in the river along with another dinosaur, the hippo and dinosaur get in a fight, the Dino wins, but instead of just eating the whole ass hippo, the dinosaur resumes going after the protagonists once it still sees them. YOU WASTED A WHOLE ASS MEAL MR DINOSAUR

[@hibernopithecus7500]

Anaconda regurgitating a meal just to hunt another. The V. Rex in Kong chasing a human while it still has a rhino-sized meal in its mouth.

[@deckardcanine]

I'm fine with monsters having a clear or unclear motive, but when it doesn't make sense, I get annoyed. Take "Ringu." Sadako wants to spread awareness of how she died. Killing people who find out about her seems self-defeating.

[@jesusromanpadro3853]

Will make more sense if her motive was just to kill more people and coping the tape just saved however does it from her.

[@intergalactic92]

From my understanding she’s only killing people who don’t spread the message e.g. by copying the tape.

[@ShinGallon]

@@intergalactic92 ^ This, it's the people who know but don't tell anyone (granted how they're supposed to know anything from what the tape shows is a mystery, but ghosts just be like that sometimes)

[@deckardcanine]

@@intergalactic92 She could have made a lot clearer what she wanted them to do.

[@kryptonianguest1903]

Ghosts having their minds short-circuited by death is such a well-established trope that filmmakers don't bother explaining it anymore.

[@LendriMujina]

I blame a lot of #3 on the modern taboo against villains that are pure evil. So many people are afraid that if they don't give the antagonist enough *lore(tm),* then that automatically equals a bad villain.

[@ludovico6890]

That's how they mess up the Shape in the Halloween sequels. And how they often mess up Dracula, trying to turn him into a sympathetic figure.

[@AnujChatterjee-q5b]

Yeah I dislike this modern taboo against pure evil villains and villains lacking detailed backstories. I think lack of a detailed backstory can add a layer of mystery and intrigue to the character. I found a recent example in Chameleon from Kung Fu Panda 4. She was a street level runt who wanted to learn kung fu to achieve power and respect but was rejected for her size and status as a lowly reptilian runt so she turned to sorcery and became a shapeshifting sorceress. A lot of people on the internet hate her backstory because it is delivered by dialogues and not as fleshed out as that of the past 3. I personally think it makes her backstory unique and mysterious. I have a lot of other examples - Grimmel the Grisly in How To Train Your Dragon 3 narrates how he killed a night fury when he was a child and how he was praised as a hero so became a night fury gunter. Riddler from Batman 2022 is a mysterious serial killer and the way he narrates his backstory to Batman feels very compelling. These are not monsters so a bit off-topic but still worth mentioning I think.

[@benjaminwatt2436]

@@AnujChatterjee-q5b same thing with morally good characters. I think people don't want to write them because its hard to pull off, theyre not appealing. people like a true hero

[@AnujChatterjee-q5b]

@@benjaminwatt2436 Yeah. I think a recent good example of a morally good hero comes from Transformers One. Its an origin story of the transformers set on the planet of Cybertron and the main protagonist is Orion Pax or Optimus Prime. He aligns with the standards of a typical morally good hero - He is compassionate, charismatic, and adventurous. But he is still engaging. He works as a lowly miner but wants to change Cybertron for the better and show that he is more than meets the eye. He does not want to execute the villains to avoid becoming like them like a typical morally good hero. All these qualities ultimately make him worthy as the leader of Cybertron. If you are aware of the Transformers movies, I highly recommend watching that movie.

[@xavierthomas5835]

​@AnujChatterjee-q5b I think this is due to characterization. For Chameleon, specifically, it's how late she comes in, as well as the quality of the villains before her. Not that they're better, just presented better. If you're going to forgo a detailed backstory, you at least need a properly menacing or present villain. She lacks in those departments to me. She is powerful, but not very menacing. It's that cerebral and poignant aspect that a backstory offers.

[@ChatarraCrow]

The graboids from Tremors are my favorite. They are intelligent, being able to adapt to and create their own plans. They force the main character to grow as a person. A lot of the movie involves trying to outsmart each other.

[@YouGuessIGuess]

Barbarian is an interesting example of a horror movie that very intentionally changes genre 2/3rds through. They know that they're evaporating the fear of the story by giving us all that backstory. By the time the monster dies it's a social commentary tragedy more akin to Us or Candyman than Halloween or Friday the 13th. However, I agree that the homeless guy giving that exposition was overkill.

[@torytellstales]

My biggest pet peeve is when every single fricken scary occurrence going on is related to Satan in some way. It's effective in movies like "The Exorcist" and "Rosemary's Baby", but when it came to the explaination of the scary things happening in the movie "Long Legs" being the result of the devil, I just sighed and rolled my eyes, since I expected something different and not the tried formula of "the devil made me do it" over and over again.

[@amidget159]

This is definitely one of your better videos. Hard concrete details with solid evidence for your arguments. Will definitely keep this in mind! Thank you!

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Thanks! The editing process got a little nightmarish today, so I'm glad to hear you enjoyed this one

[@Blueskybuffalo]

That’s literally all of his videos.

[@thestrongestnerd4284]

They’re all great videos though

[@Coroplocs-Chameleon]

One of my least favourite monsters in modern fiction is the Nightmare In Silver Cybermen from Doctor Who. SPOILERS: DOCTOR WHO SERIES 7 EPISODE 12 NIGHTMARE IN SILVER (Also, this is just my opinion so I'm not entirely sure.) The Cybermen are built up as a bigger threat than the earlier Cybus Cybermen with a more modern design and are FAR more advanced... Maybe too advanced. The NIS Cybermen are upgraded to do far more things, like turning their heads full 360, being able to convert anything quickly, and most importantly, being able to upgrade to survive anything. And that just feels stupid since they eventually just upgrade to survive basically anything and it takes away any suspense for me since i know that the heroes are basically screwed. And they survive because of a chess game. A CHESS GAME!!! Yes I just did an extremely poor explanation of NIS, but I think watching a review on it explains my point better. Edit: I completely forgot to mention that the Cybermen in the episode can move at LIGHTSPEED. And they use it just to kidnap a singular child. WHY!?!? WHY USE YOUR LIGHTSPEED JUST FOR A SINGULAR CHILD AND NOT FOR EVERYONE THERE!?!? Now THATS a Selectively Dangerous Villain.

[@darylking265]

One of the best monsters ever: Bruce. (actually, that was the nickname for the mechanical prop. ) Jaws was the quintessential monster movie.

[@BrianHeplerSasquatch]

The mistake that gets me the most is the Suddenly Stealthy Monster. For example, in the original Jurassic Park, the Tyrannosaurus Rex is so massive that it shakes the very ground and causes ripples in cups of water supported by rubber tires and shock absorbers. But it can sneak up on 3 velociraptors when the plot needs the heroes to get out of an enclosed room with mid-tier predators.

[@ajmittendorf]

I love your videos. This one is great. Thank you! I have two points of concern: First, regarding the movie "Signs," I think your criticism is actually off balance; it's a Straw Man argument because the movie isn't about the heroic defeat of the aliens. The movie's theme/message outlines the point that nothing happens by chance. Bo's nervous habit of leaving full glasses of water may lead to an underwhelming defeat of the villains, but it doesn't have to be any more heroic because the point is how everything comes together--all the puzzle pieces fall into place, if you will--to defeat the aliens who are virtually incidental. Since THAT's what the story is about, the movie is far more climactic and enjoyable. Secondly, I'm primarily a poet, although I do write a lot of short fiction. I seldom have "monsters" or villains at all. My antagonists are usually situations rather than a person or "being." My stories just don't form in my mind with a villain. So here's my question: Should I strive to try to create a villain in a story, or should I leave well enough alone? I require only an opinion.

[@AnotherDuck]

It's perfectly fine to have a non-villain antagonist. Nature is a common one, even when you don't rely on animals to act that out. The protagonist could be her own antagonist through internal conflict. And as you mention, a situation can work very well, especially if it's a short story where it's enough to have a static threat that can be overcome within that short amount of time. Don't add a villain just to add one. Figure out what makes the most sense for your story.

[@ajmittendorf]

@@AnotherDuck Excellent, Mr. Duck! Thank you! 😉

[@warpso]

Poetry is its own format and has a lot more leeway since we are more aimed at creating an atmosphere, a feeling, and/or a theme than world building or story logic. Unless it's an epic poem, then you have to show more concern for such story structure.

[@Sebastian-ub5fk]

Worst thing is when a strong monster decides to grab the heroes and toss them around instead of finishing them. Endless tossing and punching... so ridiculous.

[@artsyvideo]

The “ selectively dangerous” issue is the main reason I stopped watching “walking dead”. But it was the opposite of “ giving the main characters a break”. There were too many times when the zombies turn into an overwhelming mob in a matter of seconds, or creep up on a human without making a sound and instantly kill from behind, even when the human was being very alert. If the human was being stupid, OK. But either the zombies are just that: zombies, or they have some kind of higher, super intelligent skillset that makes them a real threat. But it can’t switch back and forth for the sake of pushing the plot forward at the writer’s convenience.

[@michaelwong9411]

One of the best examples of the inconsistently weak monster is actually in Michael Bay's "Transformers" movie. In the beginning of the film, just ONE enemy transformer wipes out an entire US military base. His weapons are so powerful that the shockwaves literally send tanks flying through the air. When he's surrounded by Humvees firing .50cal rounds at him, he shrugs them off like a gentle rain. He fires some kind of blue electrical wave-looking blast which wipes out everything for hundreds of feet in front of him: aircraft, people, everything. The scene sets up how dangerous these Decepticons are. But later in the film, these same Decepticons are so weak that you can protect yourself by hiding behind some rubble. One soldier takes out a Decepticon by sliding under him and shooting him with his rifle. They try to explain away this huge decrease in lethality and toughness by saying that they discovered they're vulnerable to "sabot" rounds, but there's no such thing as a sabot round you can fire from a handheld rifle. A sabot round is a type of munition used by main battle tanks like the M-1 Abrams. Moreover, it does not explain why the Decepticons' weapons have suddenly become so ineffective, after just one of them was able to wipe out an entire US military base by himself. How could a few fallen cinder blocks and bits of concrete protect you against a weapon that had previously sent 50-ton tanks flying through the air like toys?

[@UjjwalPrakash-c3w]

“The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown” H P Lovecraft

[@ronaldbell7429]

# Silly Weaknesses THANK YOU for bringing up Signs. Aliens decide to invade a planet covered in a deadly poison. And they decide to do it naked. "Signs" was so stupid that it was crying out for a sequel to explain what nightmare off-world game show is taking place that sent its contestants down here.

[@thedarkbard]

This came at a perfect time for me, because my whole book is essentially (without going into all the lore) two ultra powerful ‘twins’ manipulating each other. These points helped me realize that a) I needed to emphasize why each powerful ‘twin’ didn’t use said power to blitz through their problems (as the goals of each twin are mutually exclusive, but not direct opposites of each other) and b) to include dialogue and scenes explaining all the ways that the antagonist plucked strings. Your videos have helped a lot, both directly and also by just getting me thinking about the story.

[@hornet718]

I love this video! You are on point with this. A lot of the failure of a true monster lies in obvious plot armor. I would take it a step further as to why monster suck in most movies. A monster can either be an animal (a creature with limited intelligence responding to stimuli) or an intelligent creature (able to interact with its environment and adapt when necessary). I feel most times when people put monsters in their stories, they don't know if a monster is an animal or intelligent creature. Many times they vacillate between the two character points and creates a confused monster. If a monster understands how a simple machine works and uses it, then you need to establish that early in the story that they have a basic level of comprehension. If a monster is building a nuclear bomb but all of a sudden forgets how to disarm it when it is about to blow up....that is truly pathetic. I say, if you are going to make a monster the main plot of a story, let it rampage and give the heroes grief in doing it. Jaws and Terminator are the perfect examples of monsters doing exactly what they need to do in the story. There was enough explanation for both to still make them terrifying. The question was when would they show up and start the chaos? For Bruce Jaws, his theme music gave him the intro. For Terminator, he could walk in a room and sit down or drive a car through the place, you never know until it happens. Again, great video!!!

[@JacobHollner]

Signs and the water weakness really broke the tension for me. The aliens had been seen to be stalking through the cornfields. Having done plenty of that myself I know that it's impossible to do so without getting wet. Logical inconsistency.

[@racheltheradiant4675]

One I very rarely see, probably because it often gets ruined in the end of the movie. Is when the monsters seems to be intelligent, adapting , learning but by the end they no longer are smart. An example of it done well, in my opinion, is the Raptors in Jurassic Park.

[@AnotherDuck]

And only they got dealt with because the creators realised the _main_ character hadn't gotten a proper final scene yet and was due for a reappearance.

[@TheRealDan0il]

I love these videos. The advice is always spot-on and delivered in a clear, easily understandable way. Keep up the good work, my man.

[@shadow19734]

Silly weaknesses? You mean like daylight? (half of all time) Garlic. Crosses. Sharp wood. Houses. I agree. Old vampires suck.

[@AZDiabloVids]

Arya killing the night king. Build up the monster for 8 seasons, random character out of no where kills him.

[@grondhero]

There's a *_lot_* wrong with that battle, but Arya is hardly a "random character" and she'd been in the location for a bit.

[@grayscales1864]

Should Jon have played a larger role beyond yelling at a wight dragon at the climax of the battle? Yes. Should the Night King & White Walkers have been more of a present and real threat in that battle? Yes. Should Bran and the Night King had more of an interaction? Yes. Was having Arya make the final killing blow bad writing? Not even a little bit. People are mad about Arya because of all the OTHER terrible mistakes that were made, but it's actually perfect for Arya's character to play that role

[@intergalactic92]

@@grayscales1864people are mad about it being Arya because they wanted it to be Jon, because he was the "true hero". Everyone assumed they had worked out how everything was going to go, and forgot that it was a series founded on breaking the classic tropes. The 'hero' was never going to night king because that was too obvious. (And while I’m on the subject, neither Tyrion nor Jamie were ever likely to be the Volanqar and kill Cersei because that was too obvious) Reality is that Game of Thrones was much more interesting when everything was going wrong for the heroes, it lost its edge once the 'good guys' started fixing things, case in point Arya was more interesting when she was vowing revenge. The reality of her brutally murdering people wasn’t actually as fun any of us assumed it would be, so it follows that she would steadily become less likeable as time went on and it lacked the feeling of triumph when she unexpectedly became the 'hero'.

[@grondhero]

@@intergalactic92 _"(And while I’m on the subject, neither Tyrion nor Jamie were ever likely to be the Volanqar and kill Cersei because that was too obvious)"_ I think _one_ of them should have killed her because that was what was prophesied _and_ her being a cause of all her children's deaths was also foretold and that did happen.

[@Illisil]

I'd make the argument that Arya wasn't a random character...

[@BloodyHeck]

As a counterpoint to the idea about not explaining too much about the monster, I for one need to have some explanation on where it came from and what it’s doing and why.

[@AnujChatterjee-q5b]

I don't think he meant that you should not explain the monster at all. I think he meant that you should keep the expositions gradual by giving little by little, building suspense instead of explaining everything with a flashback or info dump scene. I haven't watched the movie he used in his example but I think this is what he meant from it that the movie gives a detailed info dump flashback explaining the monster.

[@wenwilloughby8197]

These are brilliant, thank you so much!

[@ShawnRavenfire]

I think the Wicked Witch of the West was the progenitor of the last-minute-instakill-weakness-reveal cliche, which, coincidentally, was also water.

[@jesusromanpadro3853]

At least in her case, it was entertaining.

[@intergalactic92]

@@jesusromanpadro3853and it fits with the vague whimsy of the setting. And continues the thread of Dorothy saving the day by killing witches by accident.

[@stellabelikiewicz1523]

In the category of heroes using courage to defeat an enemy, one of my all time favorite moments in cinema will always be Sarah saying “You have no power over me” at the end of Labyrinth. In truth that moment is about maturity more than courage, but as a little girl, it took up residence in my heart and has stayed with me as a great example of a courageous moment ever since.

[@lemonlemons]

Honestly, a pet peeve of mine is when theres too little information on the monster. I feel like i see this a lot in lovecraftian fiction or horror games where they try and hide the fact they dont have a model. Without something to try and latch on to, theres no blanks to fill in and fear. The monsters powers or abilities feel arbitrary, and theres nothing to imagine but a black fog with the word SCARY written on it.

[@thomasrdiehl]

That's the whole point of lovecraftian horror, though. The threat is something impossible to understand.

[@lemonlemons]

@@thomasrdiehl but you need to give us something to latch on to. Cthulu is still a giant squidman, Nyarlethotep has the form of the black Pharoah, and even rats in the dark has the impossible altar. It's merely the edges of something bigger but it is something, not just the scary black shadow of doom and indescribablness.

[@SamuelBlack84]

Reminds me of the recent film the Moors Just endless shots of a desolate Moor, miserable people chatting and some vague hint of some form of cosmic horror That was it Nothing happened I've seen every form of horror that exists in fiction and consider myself a true connosuir But this film just put me to sleep

[@KoongYe]

There was a scene (in Annabelle 2 I think) where a monster chased down the children and one of them are stuck in a shack with the monster. I was for sure the kid was going to die because of how fast the monster was shown in previous scenes. Then, the monster decided they wouldn't hurt this child and let her escape. I soon came to a realization that no children will die in this movie because Hollywood wouldn't allow that. The movie got 100x boring after that realization.

[@BrianHeplerSasquatch]

One of the few good points to the Mimic series is that children can and do die in the movies.

[@micahmills5769]

Unfortunately have to disagree with the barbarian example. I hate it when movies don't explain the monster at all when it's relevant to understanding the story. Unless there is a planned sequel a certain amount of understanding is necessary because if I'm confused at the end of the movie I'm not that scared This movie waited until later in the movie for that explanation. They didn't reveal it too early which is why it worked imo

[@QueenAleenaFan]

Inability to adapt, especially if the monster is at least as smart as a small child. A toddler can realize stove hot don't touch. Even if it takes getting burned once to realize

[@joseph-fernando-piano]

For me, one of the scariest movie monsters of all time was the "demon" or whatever exactly it was supposed to be from the first Paranormal Activity... by showing basically nothing of the creature, it leaves you to fill in the details with the scariest possibilities that your imagination can think up... it would have completely ruined it for me if they had shown some half-baked design of a goat-legged demon at the end...

[@sarahsander785]

Oh, the design of it was the second big mistake that killed the movies (they showed in in PA4). What bugs me more is that it got a name (I guess in PA3? Not sure). Having a name immidetly made the demon less scary. The first PA was great, mostly because of all it's limitations and they should've kept it that way.

[@ajdndbdjbdj]

For he last point, i remember a show that did the fear weakness in a good way, its called the hole

[@Tomasin19]

Video 3 of requesting GOOD VS BAD MANIPULATIVE CHARACTERS.

[@Yazuhanti]

Hey Brandon, In the Book “IT” they kill the Monster with actions not by Talking. So huge difference there.

[@jesusromanpadro3853]

I like both the original mini series and the movies, but I have to admit that it is better how they defeat him both times in the mini series.

[@ikmor]

Spoiler! . . . . . . They defeat HER by Eddie spraying water with camphor taste down her throat, Big Bill and Richie mind venturing into the outer cosmos and biting into her psychological tongue and then telling jokes, and then crushing her heart as she's in her spider form back on earth.

[@nerdyengineer7943]

I thought in the book they killed IT by orgy? Not better. Just... strange.

[@ikmor]

@@nerdyengineer7943 Nah, they ran a train on Beverly (at her initiative) to keep the magic between them, enter adulthood together, and be able to find their way out of the sewers where they defeated IT (as children).

[@JohnnyWordSmith]

When dragons forget they can breathe fire. AGHAGH

[@TedMattos]

Thanks for the video, Brandon! :) Would you ever consider doing a follow-up on showcasing examples of well-written monsters? Or if you have, please share the link. Thanks again!

[@Sunglassed_badass]

Brandon was wondering if you could do a video on good worldbuilding versus bad worldbuilding like inconsistent or just not put together well and how to properly worldbuild if you could please

[@Giovannix51]

Great advice. The mistake I hate the most (it’s more of an “off-screen” mistake), is when an obvious monster somehow manages to roam freely around the city/town.

[@ludovico6890]

In horror films, I hate when the monster kills only unpleasant victims. The Friday the 13th franchise is particularly guilty of that one: it comes to a point you're rooting for Jason. Some adaptations of Dracula made the same jarring mistake. If you want the antagonist to be both scary and hateable, you want him to hurt characters you care about, characters you can empathise with and to a degree identify with.

[@SamuelBlack84]

I don't consider killers in slasher films decent monsters Just some masked lunatic with a weapon Entertaining only to horny teens

[@ludovico6890]

@SamuelBlack84 Well, they are monsters for all intents and purposes: replace the maniac with a werewolf, a zombie, a demon, a vampire and you have the same movie. Besides, many are supernatural in nature: Jason, Freddy and I'd argue Michael Myers as well.

[@SamuelBlack84]

@@ludovico6890 It's hard to be scared of something in fiction when real life has frightened you enough already

[@ludovico6890]

@SamuelBlack84 that's the challenge of every horror movie. Heck, every horror story. Good horror stories embody real fears.

[@mohammadrezasaeedi3888]

Let the monster be monstrous even in defeat! Love how it sums up a lot of what you said.

[@micahmills5769]

That's exactly how they ruined pennywise. I noticed it in the first movie and hoped it would improve in the sequel but unfortunately it only got worse. If I remember none of the main characters were even injured

[@Persewna4]

I knew IT would be one of the examples for that last one, because absolutely YES that final battle was so underwhelming in the end! I actually haven't seen the movie, but I read the book and up until the end, I found Pennywise/IT to be a very compelling monster. But when they confronted it and it was some cosmic spider-deadlights-thing... I had trouble picturing it and that made it less scary. I was using all my energy to try to understand what the creature was that I didn't have room to feel scared of it. I usually have this issue with a number of Stephen King novels, actually; I enjoy the set-up, the build-up, the characters...but when it's time to finally face the monster, seeing it's true form is underwhelming. That happened for me with IT, Desperation, The Shining, etc. The ones that I felt did a good job of maintaining the tension were ones such as Cujo and Misery, as well as some of the short stories. I think for me, the ones that are otherworldly get less scary the more you understand them, ir at least realize that being beyond-Earth makes them beyond Earth understanding, reason, and logic, and that's less scary and more baffling. The Earth-based monsters such as a rabid dog or an obsessed fan become more frightening the more they are understood, at least for me. Or maybe it's the feeling like you should be able to reason with it, only to learn that you can't that makes them frightening to me.

[@rpgden4553]

It sucks when a monster doesn't learn from mistakes. Probably why I like dragons so much, they've seen a heroes tricks 100 times, and adapted each time.

[@Toshineko]

Dragons are the best in general, both as heroes and villains.

[@Featey]

Great video, but the reason that the Alien in Romulus doesn't killer her right away is because it wanted to hold her in place until a face hugger in the background arrived and had repopulation in mind.

[@terrencemoldern2756]

Excuses for contrived plot lines… You might as well be saying “well the people didn’t keep beating Myers because they thought he was finally dead…” There’s almost always an excuse for this stuff. Doesn’t change the fact that it is contrived, ridiculous and poorly done…

[@SamuelBlack84]

I hated Romulus Just a retread of a tired and overused franchise

[@glentz716]

The worst monster mistake of all time was in Jaws The Revenge. They invent some weird electronic device that they stick down the shark's throat that causes it intolerable pain and makes the shark leap out of the water and roar. Then Chief Brody's wife, reminiscing about all the horrible things that various sharks have done to her family (including things that she couldn't possibly know because she wasn't there) rams the boat into the shark which inexplicably blows up for no good reason.

[@grondhero]

Or the fact that the shark somehow knew the family and was following her. When I was watching the movie in theaters, I was hoping there would be some mention that it actually turned out to be two different sharks and it wasn't following her. But, no.

[@glentz716]

@@grondhero When I saw the movie, I was hoping they were going to just give me my money back out of pure shame. Still can't believe I got tricked by friends into seeing 3 and 4.

[@SamuelBlack84]

Hollywood tropes

[@beeshark222]

I hate when the monster always has a reason to do things when it’s established that it doesn’t have rational thought. Mostly I thing I read in atories and not see in movies but when it happens I just go ‘wait but why is it doing this if it doesn’t think??? Writers???’

[@AuthorWASimpson]

Hi Brandon! Great video as always. Could you provide an example of how a writer would express the courage in a compelling way? How would you have written the conclusion of the movie? Thanks!😊

[@juliussteiner8823]

True words. The stuff is only dangerous when the writer wants it to be! ***Great Videos, al lot of usefull stuff....!!!!

[@UjjwalPrakash-c3w]

It's undeniably true that a monster or an antagonist would seem fragile when they are just slaughtering maggots. When notable, well-known, and redoubtable character dies as of a monster, the monster seems frightful. Those alien stuffs can't really understand the meaning. When you would watch 'Made in Abyss' in order wise Season 1 Movie 3 Season 2 , then reverence of awe is deemed to shroud over yourself , compelling you to write your own.

[@WolfDaimyo]

What’s the footage @2:03?

[@F.A.S.D]

Yeah from which movie is that, seems like a good flick to watch

[@lemonlemons]

Alice in Borderland

[@cheesypoohalo]

I'm not sure I agree with you on Barbarian; that switch in tone with the lengthy flashback is what made the movie standout amongst the average horror movie to me. It's an unusual direction for the plot to go in and maybe even a bit gimmicky, but it was certainly interesting and kept me engaged just to see where it was taking me.

[@TheDarkSideOfIndustry]

The monster from Lost is one of the greatest monsters in fiction. Its design being simple but yet so odd is what makes it so effective, it brings out a very primal fear of the unknown. I also feel showing the monster works in this, showing a monster to much can make it less scary but because it's such a simple design it doesn’t feel cheap when it shows up. And still out of the 120 episodes of Lost you mostly just hear the monsters sounds, you only see it for about 10 minutes out of the hundreds of hours within the show.

[@brucejones950]

Brandon, I've been watching your videos for a while now and get a lot out of them. I do have one quibble about the Facehugger scene in Aliens however. Ripley had activated the Fire Safety system to let the Marines know they needed help. When the Marines shot up the facehuggers they got everyone out of the way, and with all the water pouring down, I think it's plausible that the spray helped to dilute and deflect the acid so that no one got burned. On the other hand, when the alien attacked Ripley and Hicks in the elevator before they got to the second drop ship, I do wonder how the acid didn't kill Hicks straight off.

[@CosmicFilms-007]

I made a story with monsters who were domed creatures who are frozen at night with only explaining that, while the main character is going around them quietly in a city that went dark trying to find his team, and I explain nothing else and it’s more of a backdrop Is this good? And what do you think?

[@santiagorojaspiaggio]

OMG, you're the first human being that i listen saying the same things as me about It and It Chapter Two!

[@Starcrash6984]

The best monsters I've ever seen were in the movie Arcadian. We never get too much information about them, not even at the end -- they just keep showing more and more scary abilities, constantly upping the stakes.

[@poesc]

Probably doesn’t qualify as a monster (rather a villain), but I always thought the way the Wicked Witch of the West was defeated in the Wizard of Oz was underwhelming.

[@thewanderingchelmet]

6:55 reminds me when in Mario & Luigi Partners in time the shroobs were defeated by baby tears, which was kind of a odd resolution for the games plot

[@matthewwade920]

Great channel as always Brandon - but I have to disagree with the Barbarias example - it is one story where the background adds to the premise instead of taking it away. It's not more damaging than Poltergeist explaining the origin of the ghosts. In a way, the creature in Barbarians is like a ghost - it is the remnant of past misdeeds. The past misdeeds need to be explained at some point. By the time the background is made clear, the movie can get on with a kind of genre shift - to an action movie, where the question is about how she will defeat the monster and the guy. Otherwise, so many great points, especially with Alien.

[@nathanglover8938]

What's the movie at 2:03 please?

[@hermitori6666]

I think with the barbarian example the terror of the monster was deflated purposefully and I like how it works. The film changes and balances tones, horror and absurdity. By the end you are meant to feel sympathy for the monster when it gets killed. Monsters can be forces for evil that scare us or can be sympathetic creatures who are excluded from the world, barbarian uses both tropes in the same story.

[@wabba67]

As much as I love the Alien franchise, it sure has plenty of examples of all of these (especially anything made after Alien 3). However, if I remember correctly, James Cameron did address this issue of selective dangerous monsters in the commentary track (something like "the xenomorphs must be easier to kill than in the first film, otherwise there wouldn't be a movie").

[@nelsonbutler2801]

Loved your movie examples. Another really bad monster was the alien in super 8. The movie was subpar at best but when the kid starts having a heart to heart with alien and it listens …….. man I don’t know how they approved that ending

[@thefuturist8864]

Regarding Pennywise in 'It': Stephen King has spoken about how the alien being (the entity that adopts the guise of Pennywise among others) *can* simply devour its prey, but it prefers to induce fear in them, even over long periods of time, which is like 'salting the meat' i.e. intensifying its flavour. He's also cruel, and his willingness to let the main characters live is a good way to show that he wants to toy with them as much as eat them (in fact, I found Bill Skarsgard's portrayal of Pennywise to be really interesting because he played him a bit like a child who doesn't understand why the other children don't want to play with him).This wasn't explained in either of the more recent movies, though as a fan of the original novel and of King's work in general I didn't really notice it and found the adaptation to be one of the best I've seen in a long time.

[@SamuelBlack84]

One of my favourite monsters in fiction if you can call it that is a ghost in the novel Dark Matter by Michelle Paver Essentially it's about a group of scientists in a remote Arctic cabin in the 1930s haunted by the vengeful spirit of a trapper who was murdered there in an unspeakable way The best part of the story is that it's rarely seen and generally doesn't actually do anything The horror comes from the aura of absolute terror it gives off and the characters can sense its inhuman rage and malevolence like a deafening roar They constantly feel like they're being watched, undermined emotionally and mentally coupled with the extreme environment and utter solitude The entity doesn't even want much It wants the area for itself

[@katsandall3673]

I've been trying to write a monster in my own book and I reccently discovered a new and much better way of doing that. As someone who grew up reading sherlock holmes books, is obessed with crime drama shows and reccently got into indie horror video games I find that keeping the monster mostly a complete mystery untill much later in the story is way more interesting than a monster that kills for fun and is just scary because of that. Indie horror games that are spooky and give off a sense of constant unease is more interesting than constant jumpscares because you don't know what to expect.

[@leonmayne797]

‘He’s a struggling actor who needs money.’ That’s one way to put it.

[@hunfun_dani]

I can't come up with examples now, but I know that I hate inconsistency in bad guy or monsters power. At the beginning they are unbeatable that's okay. But in many movies at the end the protagonist beats them kind of too easily without getting stronger. The bad guy or monster all of a sudden is gets weaker.... oh now I remember one recently I watch John Carpenter's Vampires movie. It had this problem big time.

[@henrynewton8267]

I think hp lovecraft did a masterclass on this stuff and is a good example because his focus was literary but the closer a movie stays to his ideas of existential dread, mental and physical isolation and the general fear of the unknown the more effective they seem to be. Everyone wants to complain they didn't see the monster enough but it ruins the mystique if we do. Everyone wants the answers but we don't care once we have them. Getting people to keep wanting those revelations is the key.

[@TotemStorms]

2 (selectively dangerous) - this is a big problem in series where the foot-soldiers are initially shown to be really impressive. The Jem'Hadar in Star Trek are meant to be genetically engineered soldiers, and are shown to be able to walk through forcefields and the like, but then suddenly get scaled back to the point where a human can wrestle effectively with them in a fight. This also applies to non-monsters, because that scene had non-humans in it (of species notably stronger than humans) who were mysteriously no better off than the humans. 5 (silly weaknesses) - this probably comes from the old folk monsters (werewolves, vampires, etc) where everyday folk needed to be able to protect themselves from them somehow, and it's just been taken as a get-out clause by more recent stories. Specifically on beating Pennywise: it does hack me off when you get a thing that feeds on fear, but can somehow be 'starved to death' in less than a minute by being confronted with courage or humour.

[@allosanthrwpos542]

Happens with villains in general , in marvel movies , main villain destroys someone in the first scene he’s introduced and then hesitates when facing out protagonists… Examples - X men apocalypse , Thor love n thunder

[@elradswordman]

Hey Brandon, thanks for this video. This time I'll keep it short : 1) pointless monsters who are just there as filler with no other reason to exist (far too present in video games, so few games are actually thinking about their bestiary. Elden Ring and Baldur's Gate 3 are among those who take care about what they make the player deal with. 2) Failed relationship between the Monster and the protagonist. If there is not believable reason for the monster to make contact with the heroes, then the plot (whatever the medium) falls apart. The contact may be forced (Alien) or chosen, but it needs to feel logical. 3) "No-life" monster : a monster that doesn't have needs or an existence beyond being in conflict with the protagonists. Now, that's a bit complicated one, but what I mean is that a monster should have an existence beyond being a punching bag for the plot. The monster, like the villain, is the hero of its own story, let's make it as complex as possible. I'll conclude by quoting something I read multiple times regarding monsters in TTRPG : it's better to talk about THE orc than about the orcs. Meaning that a well built up monster is far better than a horde of filler monsters that are thrown at the heroes out of nowhere and for no other reason than to serve as punching bags. Thanks for your video and be safe out there, All the best in the world, Regards

[@wikusklinkert]

I know this sounds a little weird but, you have to have a balance with the amount of kills the monster has... Too little, makes the monster less scary Too much, makes the monster become boring very quickly I believe this is why the best horror stories have smaller groups of characters Alien l - perfect amount of characters for the audience to remember and care about each individual Alien vs Predator - so many nameless characters in that expedition that it feels like they just added extra bodies for kills who weren't even there before, it is too much, nobody cares by the midway point.

[@billyfarmerii1669]

My favorite “monster” right now is from the show From. Which, honestly, the town itself IS the monster. No one know its origin or how to escape or defeat it… then you have actual monsters that hunt you down at night and other monsters in the forest. 😬 what y’all think?

[@Tomfoolery-of5gp]

In Alien Romulus, the xenomorph wasn't waiting to kill her. It was waiting for a facehugger that was nearby to jump on her face.

[@elizabethcolebourn9587]

I actually thought the clown in IT was scary, and I overlooked some of the scenes that didn't make sense. However, I never liked the ending, thought it was dumb, and I'm glad you agree! I thought the movie IT Follows was terrifying. I never caught the part of her hair being pulled, but now that you mention it, you're right! Sometimes when a movie is successful in so many other ways, perhaps we're willing to forgive the inconsistencies. I really enjoyed Alien 1 and 2. The rest of them were terrible. They copied the same plot - a monster running through tunnels and air ducts. What a surprise. The monster I think is the stupidest is Michael Myers. The original had me hooked. The sequels were ridiculous.

[@rylansato]

I’d like your take on some Japanese horror writing such as Ju-on and Ringu. Their horror is on a whole other level. I feel those monsters are more competent for lack of a better word.

[@ascenziobilelloiii6611]

I'm gonna go with betraying the monster's potential and theme. I am a massive godzilla fan even of the admittedly terrible movies (there are many). The original godzilla was such an impactful deep and artistic film ahead of its time and Godzilla as a monster is so versatile and interesting for so many types of stories... and they turn him into a goofy childrens super hero or a campy monster mash beat em up guy 99% of the time. Hardcore fans write such compelling fan fiction and theres so many great themes stories and approaches to godzilla. I was so happy to see Minus One do it justice

[@CosmicPhilosopher]

I had heard good things, but when I finally saw Minus One myself, I was blown away. Even more amazing when you hear how small their budget was. Its effects blew away many movies with 10x the budget.