Monster House(in Hollywood Movies) Monster House (2006) - Download Movie for mobile in best quality 3gp and mp4 format. Also stream Monster House on your mobile, tablets and ipads
Plot: The teenage DJ is observing his neighbor Nebbercracker on the other side of their street in the suburb that destroys tricycles of children that trespass his lawn. When DJ's parents travel on the eve of Halloween and the abusive nanny Zee stays with him, he calls his clumsy best friend Chowder to play basketball. But when the ball falls in Nebbercracker's lawn, the old man has a siege, and soon they find that the house is a monster. Later the boys rescue the smart Jenny from the house and the trio unsuccessfully tries to convince the babysitter, her boyfriend Bones and two police officers that the haunted house is a monster, but nobody believes them. The teenagers ask their video-game addicted acquaintance Skull how to destroy the house, and they disclose its secret on the Halloween night. Runtime: 91 mins Release Date: 20 Jul 2006
Spectacular visuals, unforgettable characters, and a fairy tale story with a twist! Highly recommend the Real D 3-D version if available in your area.Movie was scary, funny, dramatic and entertaining all at once. However, some parts of the movie may be a little too scary for kids 8 and under. For grown ups that still try to catch every episode of SpongeBob, this is it!The Real D 3-D version added to the movie going experience. I didn't experience fatigue or dizziness for the entirety of the movie -- which was more common in previous 3-D movie technology. When I saw the beginning of the <more>
end credits, the experience just leaves you begging for more -- but for now, I know that desire can be satisfied by watching this movie again in the near future.
Animation is qualitatively superior to what I've seen before (by dmcginnis86)
This film was just fabulous. Digital animation of people is supposed to be really difficult; this film made it look effortless. Unlike most animated films, the camera angles weren't static; the illusion of reality was heightened by a sense that there was a camera on-set with carefully planned pans and tracking shots. Oddly enough, I thought the basketball game early in the film was one of the best pieces of animation throughout though it had little to do with the plot . Take note of the unsteady camera effect. This reminded me of the CGI in "Firefly" -- the shaking camera is a <more>
particularly cool effect when you know that the entire scene is artificially created .The story and characters were fabulous as well. I took my five-year-old to see it and he wasn't unpleasantly scared... he just thought it was cool. I can't wait for the DVD to come out -- hopefully at Halloween. What a great film!
The movie of Monster House is a great movie,in my opinion.However, I do not think younger kids will enjoy the movie.I think that due to some scary scenes which may scare them.It also includes a little brief language. Older kids may find cool and interesting.It would not be scary to them, though.I also really enjoyed that we can watch " Monster House" in 3D.Overall,I truly enjoyed watching the movie. I do agree with the rating being PG Parental Guidance Suggested . It will probably to continue to do good all over Canada. I think the studio which is Columbia Pictures should make a <more>
sequel.Again, kids aged 8 and over will probably be interested in the movie.MONSTER HOUSE IS GREAT!!!!I really liked this movie!
This movie caught me by surprise (by ryandouglassw)
Monster House was a perfect combination of kid-friendliness, horror, action and adventure. When I first walked into the theater I thought it would be "kiddy" because I went to see it with my younger cousin. You know how most animated movies are somewhat funny and about teamwork and working together or teaches life lessons or morals but I actually came to find that this movie was more scary than comical or ethical. I actually got into it. I actually ended up liking it more than my cousin. Some of the content is for older kids but it's non-stop action and the momentum of the story <more>
line never stops. And the characters seem so real. 2 thumbs up. I definitely recommend it.
A trio of preteens must work together to conquer the frightening house across the street when they discover that it is alive. (by badkitty1769)
Let's be clear - Monster House is not your typical 'feel-good' children's movie. That isn't to say, however, that there are never any points where the viewer is allowed to feel good. In fact, I discovered, despite my initial resistance to a movie that I thought would simply impress me graphically, copious moments of warmth and humor within the unembellished and utterly human actions of the characters. This is the movie's paramount success. Not the plot, the myriad celebrity voices, or even the decisively unique and dazzling computer animation. Where Monster House <more>
really shines is within the dialogue and behavior of its perfectly believable personalities. From the girl-musings and growing pains of the pubescent DJ and Chowder to the cantankerous rantings of their crotchety old neighbor Nebbercracker, the cast is so natural that one would expect to run across such people within day-to-day life. It is this element that helps Monster House transcend an entirely surreal plot to make an idea so bizarre and twisted seem entirely real. It is true that Monster House does contain a predominantly dark theme, with a considerable amount of eerie scenes to support it. I don't believe, however, that this should keep it from being shared with children, especially those preadolescences that will soon enough be able to relate to the emotions and actions of its protagonists. As long as younger children have the guidance of a parent or other compassionate adult, this film has the potential be viewed and adored by all ages.
i have meaner neighbours obsessed about their lawns (by pookey56)
there was something about Mr Nebbercracker that provoked suspicion about just how terrible a guy he really was. the fact that i wondered about this is, in my opinion, a testament to the superior animation and performances in this film. The characters were well fleshed out as well. How many of us have had best friends like Chowder? Or a baby-sitter like Zee? And Jenny, the very wise preppy with a great business mind, was vulnerable yet courageous, a theme applicable to almost every character. i am a fan of everyone in this film: Steve Buscemi, Maggie Gyllenhaal.Kevin James, Kathleen Turner, <more>
Jason Lee,Catherine O'Hara and Fred Willard, and the kids portrayed by Michael Musso, Sam Lerner and Spencer Locke...everyone was convincing, empathetic, and engaging. This collaboration by Zemekis and Spielberg delivered an excellent piece which we've come to expect from these two masters. The direction by Gil Kenan had a great mix of scariness and compassion; and the screenplay is a star unto itself. What i enjoyed the most about this film, is the tenderness and devotion, courage and tenacity shown by the lead characters. And of course, Mr Nebbercracker. Ir's about love, after all. Ir's a great family film, perhaps for older children as well as adults, and it has a kind message disguised within an 'animated' horror. And the dual meaning applies. Ir had it's scary moments for sure. and an interesting, although guessable, story line.But this didn't take away anything from the film. I enjoyed it quite a lot, and wouldn't hesitate to take my niece or nephew or friends' child just to see it again. OK. so i'd watch it again by myself or with another adult too. Highly recommended!
I just saw this movie at the Seattle International Film Festival. I didn't know what to expect, but I must say I found it quite enjoyable. There was a lot of talk before the movie. People were saying that it will be too scary for the little kids, but not adult enough to capture older kids attention.I can see it being quite frightening at times for the little ones, but of the kids in the theater its not like I heard any of them screaming mommy. I don't know how well the movie will do with kids, but from an adult's perspective, its definitely worth a viewing.The best part of the <more>
movie definitely has to be the characters. Each were extremely well thought out and put together. They did a fantastic job of matching right voices with the right characters. Characters facial expressions were amazing. You'll find yourself laughing at things they say and do quite a lot.The animation looks great. They certainly aren't ground breaking. But they fit the movie well. However, I will say that some scenes looked quite amazing.If you are looking for a fun, clean movie with plenty of laughs and chuckles, this is definitely one you don't want to miss!
The story is the key to the movie, and it's very good. (by steve.schonberger)
Looking out his window, DJ Mitchel Musso sees a creepy-looking house Kathleen Turner . It's owned by Mr Nebbercracker Steve Buscemi , who really doesn't want people on his lawn. Toys that end up there disappear, taken by Nebbercracker to discourage trespassing. DJ catalogs the lost items, but his parents Catherine O'Hara and Fred Willard aren't interested in his observations of the house. Just before Halloween, his parents leave him home, in the care of babysitter Elizabeth Maggie Gyllenhaal , who prefers the nickname "Z". His friend "Chowder" Sam <more>
Lerner visits, and joins his observation of the house. They spot Jenny Spencer Locke, who is a girl whose parents stuck her with a boy's name about to try to sell Halloween candy to Nebbercracker, and hurry to talk her out of approaching the house. Before long, they discover that Nebbercracker isn't the only thing that's creepy about the house. The house, it seems, has a life of its own.This movie started as a script that sat unproduced for years, for want of technology and the right people to make it. The technology that went into it turned out to be the same sort of animation as _The Polar Express_, digital animation based on motion capture. Like _Polar_, it has a stylized look rather than attempting photorealism, but instead of taking the look of paintings in a book, it took the look of extremely detailed dolls and doll accessories. But with motion capture driving the movements of the characters, they end up with a lot of personality, which overrides their stylized look. The animation is least effective in the climax scene at the end, where it exaggerates the action just a bit too far for my tastes, but even there it's pretty good. Most of the time the animation is excellent, with just the right degree of exaggeration to fit the stylized look. The sets are very good, particularly a construction site near the house. I'd rate the animation very good.More important than the technology is the story. What really makes the images on the screen interesting is the way they serve the story. Comparing with _The Polar Express_ again highlights the point -- this movie had a solid story, compared with _Polar_, which expanded a very thin children's book into a feature-length story. This movie's story isn't in a class with the best of Pixar, but the film-makers are clearly aware of the fact that the strength of the story is very important. I'd rate the story very good.The voice and motion capture performances, shot in only 34 days, are almost all excellent. My favorite was Maggie Gyllenhaal, who was wonderful in her supporting part as babysitter "Z". The least satisfying, I thought, was Jon Heder as video-game master "Skull" , and he was good, just not great. Even Kathleen Turner, as the house, performed in the motion capture space, moving around in a neighborhood constructed of foam. I really hope that the director wasn't joking when he said he might include her motion capture video as a DVD extra. Nick Cannon, as a rookie police officer, was probably the funniest character, relative to his screen time.Kathleen Turner's presence in the cast is a bit of a nod to executive producer Robert Zemeckis, who cast her as Jessica Rabbit in _Who Framed Roger Rabbit_. She was thrilled by the part, which gave her a grotesque role to mirror her glamorous role as Jessica Rabbit. Other Zemeckis references are more obvious. Most obvious one is in the opening, featuring a leaf. Another deals with a basketball -- originally an accident during production. Others may exist, but it's not packed with pop culture references like the _Shrek_ movies.Directing an animated film is different in a lot of ways from directing live action, which makes it more complicated to rate. Directing this movie involved directing both the motion capture performances and the camera positioning. The director took the script, and made complete storyboards from it. From those, he made an animatic, which guided the way he directed the motion capture shoot. Because of the way character interactions affected the results, he said that he ended up throwing out all the storyboarding, but I'd guess he meant that figuratively. The character interaction looked really good, better than almost any animated movie I've seen. I'd rate the directing excellent, in a class with Pixar.Overall, I'd rate the movie very good, mostly on the strength of the story. Kids are usually easy to please, and they'll probably find the movie excellent. Adults are harder to please. Where _Shrek_ emphasizes pop culture references for adult appeal, this movie targets adults' memories of childhood, effectively drawing adults into enjoying it like the kids in the audience.Credits: There are a few additional scenes after the credits begin. Don't run out right away. Stick around at least until the fine-print credits roll.Personal appearances: The director, Gil Kenan, and a couple of the producers I don't know which ones, but not Spielberg or Zemeckis were there. The director took questions from the audience, and answered very enthusiastically -- he seemed like he was thrilled to see his film in front of a real audience, and not burned out from hearing the same questions over and over. He was really nice to the kids in the audience, and behaved like he was new to the experience of being the center of attention. He signed lots of autographs including one for me , and seemed genuinely pleased that people cared enough to ask. That's a reaction that one might expect for the director of something obscure, but uncommonly nice for the director of a big-budget summer movie.The US rating is "PG", for some scary scenes and supposedly "crude humor and brief language". The crude humor is minimal, compared to typical movies aimed at kids. I can't think of any inappropriate language.
Well, I think if I saw this movie when I was ten years old, I would have been totally scared and could not sleep for weeks. Now it seems time has changed: ten-year-old children are playing horror-video games so probably what was too scary for them in the eighties is just right and fun now. Actually this is just what you could expect from a movie about a monster house: funny, spectacular, sometimes frightening. Quite a well-developed story - even if it is full of clichés, or should I say homage? - with the usual "two boys, one girl" trio as seen in Star Wars or Harry Potter. The <more>
animation is strange at first: they seem like rubber dummies, but thanks to the motion capture, their movement and expressions are first rate. While they look like having plastic hair, there is a great development since Polar Express in one field: their eyes are constantly moving - full of life. And the whole movie is just a typical and fun Spielberg-Zemeckis production with elements of Hitchcock. Besides the extraordinarily dark scenes it just feels like those very entertaining Spielberg productions of the eighties.