Paul W. S. Anderson’s Monster Hunter wants to be a gateway drug. It wants to take players who know the Capcom games cold and hand them over to viewers who have never heard of Rathalos. That ambition is both the film’s strength and its fatal flaw.
The setup is simple. Captain Artemis (Milla Jovovich) and her UN security team get pulled through a portal into a new world ruled by monsters. They meet a hunter (Tony Jaa), who may be their only way home. The film spends its runtime trying to sell that premise to an audience that has never seen a Nerscylla.
Trailer, via Sony Pictures Entertainment.
The Hunter and the Soldier
Jaa plays the hunter as a man of few words and a sharper sword. His fights are the best reason to watch this movie. Anderson knows how to stage a physical clash, and Jaa delivers one with real weight. Their first meeting, a fight that ends with reluctant cooperation, sets the tone for the whole film: two people who don’t trust each other but need each other to survive.
Jovovich, Anderson’s wife and longtime lead, carries the human side. Her Artemis is competent and scared in equal measure, which sells the stakes of being trapped in a world where bullets barely scratch the targets. Ron Perlman shows up as Admiral, the leader of the hunter’s crew, and T.I. plays Link, a sniper. Diego Boneta rounds out the team as a communications specialist.
The Monsters and the Desert
The creatures are the draw. The Diablos, a horned monster that moves beneath the sand, is a real threat. The Nerscyllas, monstrous arachnids, swarm in packs. The Sky Tower, the structure that creates the portals, looms across the desert. The film leans on these monsters to do the heavy lifting, and they mostly deliver.
But the script doesn’t give them much room to breathe. The story is thin. Artemis gets injected with a paralyzing venom and wakes up in a Nerscylla lair. She escapes by setting the pursuers on fire. That’s a decent beat, but it’s buried under exposition about portals and a vague threat that never quite materializes.
Editing and Direction
Where the film stumbles is in its direction and editing. Anderson has made a career out of big, dumb spectacle, and that’s exactly what Monster Hunter is. The action is overlong, the pacing is uneven, and the final act drags. There’s a rhythm problem here that even Jaa can’t fix.
| Element | Strength | Weakness |
|---|---|---|
| Monsters | Visually impressive | Underused |
| Hunter vs. Soldier dynamic | Grating chemistry | Thin character development |
| Visual effects | Polished | Overlong action |
| Musical score | Serviceable | Unremarkable |
The Numbers
- Runtime: 103 minutes
- Budget: $60 million
- Worldwide gross: $47.9 million
- Final score: 4.7/10
The film was announced in 2018, and it shows. The production design is solid, the creature work is strong, but the story is rushed. Anderson wanted to make a movie that introduced the Monster Hunter universe to people who hadn’t played the games. Instead, he made a movie that assumes you have.
The action is fun to watch, but it’s not enough to carry the weight of the plot. The film is a box office bomb, grossing only $47.9 million against a $60 million budget. That’s a failure on paper, and it’s a failure on screen too.
Monster Hunter is a missed opportunity. It has the pieces of a great monster movie — a compelling lead, a worthy adversary, and a world worth exploring — but the direction and editing keep it from clicking. The action is overlong, the stakes are muddled, and the ending feels rushed.
This is a film that understands its premise but can’t execute it. The hunter and the soldier are a great pairing. The monsters are a spectacle worth seeing. The story is not.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.
