how to make a monster movie review

‘How to Make a Monster’: The 1950s Original and the 2001 Update [Revenge of the Remakes]

Before you dart toward the comments to argue that George Huang’s How to Make a Monster isn’t a remake, let me explain why it’s my focus this month.

In 2001, legendary special effects artist Stan Winston co-produced a series of made-for-cable “remakes” alongside Colleen Camp and Lou Arkoff based on AIP horror flicks of the 1950s. They were all monster films based on Samuel Z. Arkoff properties (Lou’s father) under the banner “ Creature Features .” Winston developed these films for Cinemax and HBO, where they’d haunt late-night rotations. He even turned his “Creature Features” villains into a toy line, although sales were underwhelming because the figures released out of synch with each premiere.

I used quotations around “remakes” above because 2001’s How to Make a Monster is a remake by title only. Herbert L. Strock’s 1958 original is about a makeup effects artist who uses his secret foundation recipe to control actors. Huang’s Aughts update is decidedly not. They’re both horror movies, and they’re both about creative artists who are doomed by their professional obsessions, but they’re hardly siblings. How to Make a Monster is an example of a remake that barely engages with its source material; think House of Wax (2005). That’s why it’s under my microscope. It’s an entirely different “remake” despite being in a collection touted as all remakes.

Why snag rights to create something with zero resemblance to the first? Let’s investigate.

The Approach

‘How to Make a Monster’ (1958)

I’m still trying to figure out why Winston produced a remake of a horror movie about a mad special effects artist … and removed the special effects story. Writers Herman Cohen and Aben Kandel wrote a story about how the horror genre is always in demand — how the “horror cycle” always returns — making the call from inside Hollywood. It’s brilliant and could have been adapted so easily after Scream introduced the late 90s/early 00s meta-horror movement. The entry point for a How to Make a Monster remake was handed to Huang on a silver platter, who smacks the opportunity to the ground. Everything tantalizing about Cohen and Kandel’s industry-skewering thriller is switched for another generic monster-of-the-day blueprint about a murderous video game.

American International Studios is traded for Clayton Software in the Creature Features version. Robert H. Harris’ master creature designer (Pete Dumond) swaps for Steven Culp’s savvy businessman Peter S. Drummond — if that’s even a callback to the original protagonist’s name. Clayton Software CEO Faye Clayton ( Colleen Camp ) hires Pete and his trifecta of oddball programmers to fix their laughingstock of a horror video game, “Evilution.” To make matters worse, when testing the clanky motion capture suit (worn by “Queen of B-movies” Julie Strain ), systems overload and reboot efforts bring the suit to life. With the deadline rapidly approaching, Pete, his team, and intern Laura ( Clea DuVall ) find themselves fighting the very game they created, now an immersive experience hunting them around Clayton Software’s high-tech facilities.

If you squint, you can see where Huang tries to honor the vastly superior 1950s spectacle. Peter S. Drummond allows himself to be consumed by his profession the same way Pete Dumond burns alive with his “children” (a unique collection of movie-made masks). Faye, the corporate overlord type, demands that Evilution be scarier, alluding to a world where horror is not only thriving but the driving force behind entertainment companies — precisely what Strock tries to say, albeit through vastly different means. In both films, victims are killed by a monster controlled by “magical” means, be they hypnotic adhesive cream or haywire artificial intelligence. That’s the best I’ve got.

The approach? It’s like Huang accidentally spilled water on a whiteboard with Cohen and Kandel’s original outline, erased everything, and pieced together a story based on objects you’d find in a teenage boy’s bedroom (Playboy posters, computer games, plastic swords).

Does It Work?

‘How to Make a Monster’ (2001)

Answering “Does it Work?” is complicated because that depends on whether you classify How to Make a Monster (2001) as a remake. I do because a remake in name only is still a remake; it’s just a different conversation than usual around these parts. “But Matt, you’re always saying remakes should be original.” Correct! They should also resemble their original — that’s the balance. What’s the point when you abandon everything about an original work but slap the name on the can for nostalgic appeal? It’s an unfortunate case of false representation in this case, really.

Huang adapts “How to Make a Monster” as a concept, not an existing film. The words in the title inspire his remodel. Standard damn-the-man ammunition fires at corporate America instead of Hollywood studios, and the monster’s beginnings reflect Frankenstein more than anything psychologically supernatural. It’s not a terrible idea — I’ll always advocate for more video game horror titles like Stay Alive — but it’s an underwhelming idea compared to Strock’s innovative approach to industry shenanigans. Huang’s screenplay isn’t breaking new ground by saying people are driven by money and the wrong types of number-crunching suits run creative industries.

On a more positive note, Huang’s special effects creatives don’t undersell the nightmarish details of the film’s video game adversary. Where Stronk’s antique is an accomplished example of old-school makeup techniques, turning pretty-boy leading men into werewolves and bulgy-eyed freaks, Huang’s crew imagines a more techno-horror barbarian. How to Make a Monster lets Winston showcase his talents, stepping in for the fictional Pete Dumond — or, more appropriately, visual effects creator Paul Blaisdell (whose iconic masks were lit ablaze in the original’s finale inferno). The prior creations look fabulous for their period, and so does Evilution ’s medieval hellspawn — at least Huang brings that competency to the table.

Strock’s How to Make a Monster (1958) is imaginative fine dining; Huang’s How to Make a Monster (2001) is a lukewarm seven-layer dip made from nothing but on-sale processed ingredients. The remake is an after-dark cable special that is appreciated as a sort of cult classic, hardly recognized past its monster effects and goofball humor. Many an underage child no doubt felt a sexual awakening thanks to Julie Strain’s nudie mo-cap routine, or covered their eyes when mangled body parts became a demonic skeleton Viking with metallic orbs for eyeballs. It’s hardly bulletproof nor a proper representation of Strock’s more successful ideas, existing in a pre-streaming era where straight-to-TV specials on unrated channels could perv out and heap on gore without censorship. Better times, worse times; those days were a bit of both.

Neither film overlaps characters or performances, so the new cast has no crossover points. Tyler Mane as Triple H Lite “Hardcore,” Jason Marsden as squeaky-voiced “Bug,” and Karim Prince as Boris Grishenko wannabe “Sol” play aggressively 2000s programmer stereotypes from the meathead weapons expert (Mane) to acne-suffering dweeb (Marsen). They’re all hamming up caricatures drawn by outsiders responding to the prompt “video game addict,” making the most of a silly script that only cares about making a monster (as the title states). Strock directs something more sinfully sophisticated, while Huang creates something you’d download off Limewire along with twenty new viruses. There is no harm in either, although Clea DuVall cannot escape terrible dialogue ripped from a company’s corny in-house workplace behavior training video.

I’d reckon How to Make a Monster plays infinitely better if you’ve never seen the (mostly) black-and-white original. Huang’s erasures and modifications are a different flavor of horror cinema, like a store-brand box of macaroni and cheese (not even Kraft). Both films question whether the right people are in charge of creative industries, but Huang’s execution is far more redundant. “The Monster” stalks characters one by one; they die bloody deaths, and Laura eventually has to vanquish the game’s horned-skull boss in reality because everyone loves a final girl. It’s just a shame the Cinemax remix has nothing to say about the industry outside references like Pikachu skins used for horrendously pixelated demons in Evilution , or an Evil Dead: Hail to the King poster in the background.

The original wants to say something; the remake wants to slay something.

There’s a fine line between remakes with their own personality and remakes that completely negate the source material. How to Make a Monster (2001) chooses the latter, and it’s a foolish option. I’m still gobsmacked by the refusal to take an easy layup of going all New Nightmare or Scream 3 with How to Make a Monster , especially with Winston’s involvement. Imagine a horror movie where “Fake Stan Winston” was creating astounding horror creatures only he could control, for example. It didn’t even have to be applied makeup effects only! What if Winston’s Pumpkinhead suit came alive and started lurking around his latest sequel’s set?

There’s a much better How to Make a Monster remake somewhere out there that has not yet been made — maybe focusing on Tom Savini or at least his accomplishments in the field?

So what did we learn?

● Michael Myers got killed by a video game skelly boi?

● The 2000s illustrations of post-Y2K “nerds” sure have aged hilariously, in a film so “2000s,” there’s a P.O.D. needed drop that isn’t “Boom.”

● A remake should at least want to try to resemble its original, just a little bit.

● Is a remake by name even a remake? Yes, it is, but whether that’s a feature or bug is up to you.

You ever turn a movie on, a certain scene hits, and suddenly, you realize you’ve seen said movie a bunch growing up? That happened to me while watching How to Make a Monster (2001). It was a late-night Cinemax staple when I was the right age. I used to sneak-watch Huang’s flick before my horror fandom days, definitely without my mother’s permission (she was the Ratings Police in my household). When Monster Sol pops onto the screen, colored wires hooking into his skin, those chrome Baoding balls shoved into his eye sockets, nostalgia socked me in the face. Not even Strand’s jiggling fetishistic cosplay could jostle the memory free, but “Dead Sol” did the trick.

You may like

‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers’ Only Got Better from 1956 to 1978 [Revenge of the Remakes]

‘The Fog’ 19 Years Later: There’s a Reason You Don’t Remember This John Carpenter Remake

‘Rollerball’ Turned a 1970s Cult Classic into an Early 2000s Studio Disaster [Revenge of the Remakes]

5 Deep Cut Horror Movies to Seek Out in July 2024

New month, new horror recommendations from  Deep Cuts Rising . This installment’s five selections reflect the month of  July 2024 .

Regardless of how they came to be here, or what they’re about, these past movies can generally be considered overlooked, forgotten or unknown.

This month’s offerings include a snake thriller, a giallo, and more.

Death Walks on High Heels (1971)

Directed by Luciano Ercoli .

For fans, July is dedicated to gialli. And one giallo that doesn’t come up too often in discussions is Death Walks on High Heels ( La morte cammina con i tacchi alti in Italian). After  Nieves Navarro ‘s character’s father — a jewel thief — is murdered, the masked assailant comes after the daughter. The protagonist flees to England, however, her pursuer won’t stop until he gets what he seeks.

Death Walks on High Heels  never quite reaches the heights of its contemporaries, yet the twisty story, small bursts of style, and a potent third act make Ercoli’s movie   enjoyable.

Death Walks on High Heels  is now streaming on SCREAMBOX .

Of Unknown Origin (1983)

Directed by George P. Cosmatos .

This entry works for Ratcatcher’s Day (July 22) and Paperback Book Day (July 30). Of Unknown Origin is based on the novel  The Visitor by Chauncey G. Parker III, and the movie stars Peter Weller of  RoboCop  fame.  Shannon Tweed also had her acting debut here. The story follows a father and husband (Weller) who stays behind in his family’s brownstone as his wife and son go on vacation. What should have been a productive time soon becomes an all-out battle once the main character learns he has a rat infestation and goes to great lengths to wipe out the vermin.

While Of Unknown Origin  is more of a laser-focused psychological horror story than a typical creature-feature, it does contain intense man-versus-beast action. Weller’s performance can be praised as well.

Catch  Of Unknown Origin on VOD sites like Prime Video and Apple , and it’s also available on Blu-ray from Shout! Factory.

Fair Game (1988)

Directed by Mario Orfini .

The Italian-made thriller Fair Game  (also known as  Mamba ) is suitable for World Snake Day (July 16). This cat-and-mouse movie pits a woman ( Trudie Styler ) against her ex ( Gregg Henry ) as well as a highly venomous mamba. The main character is trapped in her apartment with the creature, who has been been made more aggressive for this special occasion.

Although this movie has pacing issues, and the high concept would better serve a shorter feature or even a segment of an anthology, it does manage to brew some suspenseful moments.

Fair Game  is now streaming on Tubi .

The Paperboy (1994)

Directed by Douglas Jackson.

While  The Paperboy  brings up Boston, this is, in fact, a Canadian production. Marc Marut plays the titular 12-year-old whose paper route includes murder. He soon target his latest victim’s daughter, who is played by Christine co-star  Alexandra Paul .

The Paperboy won’t likely replace  The Good Son  or  Orphan as everyone’s favorite “killer kid” movie, but the sinister atmosphere and (unintentional) humor help it stand out. House star William Katt also supports Paul and Marut here, with the latter’s performance being truly wild.

Looking for Canadian horror   for Canada Day (July 1)? The Paperboy is now on Prime Video .

Estranged (2015)

Directed by Adam Levins .

Estranged demonstrates how dangerous it can be to forget the past.  Amy Manson ‘s character is returned to her family after a bad accident while living abroad. She uses a wheelchair for the time being, and her memory is affected. As she reunites with her family though, the main character can’t help but feel like something is “off” about them…

This dark British movie can be viewed on I Forgot Day (July 2). It sports enough shocks to make it memorable. Estranged  is now streaming on Tubi .

No genre is as prolific as horror, so it’s understandable that movies fall through the cracks all the time. That is where this recurring column,  Deep Cuts Rising , comes in.  Each installment of this series will spotlight several unsung or obscure movies from the past — some from way back when, and others from not so long ago — that could use more attention.

Five Independence Day Set Horror Movies to Stream This Week

‘Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire’ Coming to Halloween Horror Nights 2024

The 10 Best Horror Movies Released in the First Half of 2024

‘The Last Breath’ Unleashes Sharks Inside a World War II Shipwreck [Trailer]

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Letterboxd — Your life in film

Forgotten username or password ?

• Start a new list…
• Add all films to a list…
• Add all films to watchlist

Add to your films…

Press Tab to complete, Enter to create

A moderator has locked this field.

Add to lists

Where to watch

How to make a monster.

Directed by George Huang

What started out as a simple game... became a virtual nightmare.

Video game developer Clayton Software enlists the talents of a misfit group of programmers to develop the scariest computer combat game: EVILUTION. With four weeks to bring the game to market and a million-dollar bonus on the line, they utilize a telemetry suit to render a 3-D version of the onscreen player. But when a power surge gives the hard drive a mind of its own, the suit comes to life to play the game for real and the programming team find themselves in the middle of a chilling virtual nightmare beyond their wildest imagination.

Clea DuVall Steven Culp Tyler Mane Jason Marsden Karim Prince Julie Strain Danny Masterson Colleen Camp Hillary Tuck Nick Wright

Director Director

George Huang

Producers Producers

Colleen Camp Samuel Z. Arkoff Stan Winston

Writer Writer

Cinematography cinematography.

Steven Finestone

Camera Operator Camera Operator

Creature Features Productions LLC

Releases by Date

29 sep 2007, 11 jun 2002, 14 oct 2001, releases by country.

• Physical DVD

91 mins   More at IMDb TMDb Report this page

Popular reviews

Review by Slig001 ★★½

A reimaging of the 1958 horror for Cinemax, which relocates the action from a movie studio to a video game development office. The vast majority of the film takes place in a single location and focuses on a group of developers trying to make a "scary" video game, only for the motion capture suit to come alive following a power surge. I suppose the most amazing thing about this film is the fact that it got made. A truly bizarre slice of horror. The opening act focuses on the drama between a ragtag bunch of videogame developers, before things finally get moving by way of a cameo from Julie Strain. We then get a mixture of shlocky special effects and…

Review by emilyrugburn ★★★

This has the tone of an R-rated disney channel movie and I mean that as half a compliment

Review by Carlo V 1

50's monster movie remake produced by Sam Arkoff/Stan Winston/Colleen Camp, directed by Taiwanese-American director George Huang... but now it's about a video game company and a killer motion capture suit? Fuck me up fam. There's a lot of like, gross gatekeepery nerd behavior in this but it all comes from characters who from the getgo are established as "bad" (these 3 dudes who get hired to retool a game to be more "xXxtreme") and in the end even Danny Masterson shows up as an abusive boyfriend (what a stretch) to make sure we're all on team Clea DuVall. Feels extremely like a Canadian TV production even tho I can't find any info on filming locations, but this is basically a…

Review by Keith ★★★

Somewhere between a Disney Channel Original and a John Carpenter movie. But it’s 2001, so that movie is Ghosts of Mars.

Review by kaero the unseen ★★★½

Ridiculous software developer fun. This may not have aged perfectly but it’s still pretty goofy and the story is kind of weird like a twilight zone episode.  One of the neat things about video game development is that you get to see all those lines of code come to life! 😱  Plus you get to control it, allegedly.  It’s a little light on the horror side, but it’s still fun and you’ll want to find out what happens.  Badass overly deep ending.  

Recommend for developers, game enthusiasts, or anyone who’s stood at a server rack yelling random technology terms.

Review by cherryz ★★

BONUS: Watch a Julie Strain movie

The game creators played out like a wrestling story. Hardcore, Bug, and Sol - those names, that's their personality with a sprinkle of extra toppings. Julie Strain's part gave me a bouncy smile.

However, I had to choke down the being nice will get you nowhere message until my brain had a power surge then ripped out my head via my spinal chord. 

I do like the idea of designing a game where the suit becomes real.

Review by Jay D 's Watching ★½

This review may contain spoilers. I can handle the truth.

It's hard to dislike a movie that turns on the incredibly cornball reveal that it's title isn't in reference to its shuffling, homicidal soundboard of an AI-generated computer frankenbeast that's terrorizing the other characters (who can be counted off on less than two full hands), but is in reference to what it takes to get to the top of the cutthroat games industry, a bitter workplace satire that's made a bit more toothful (not much, it's a bad script, but still) by the fact that Clea Duvall, playing the protagonist, gives the film a bit of girls against boys energy before she meets her end as suit-wearing bosslady------but there's a cameo by an unbilled Danny Masterton as Duvall's abusive boyfriend in the second act that manages, in 2018, to be both random AND uncomfortable, and chips away a little of that B-Movie Goodwill.

Review by Zach Rayman ★★★½

Daily Horror Hunt 32: Film #18 of 28

This was super weird, I had to find a horror movie about game design and this was pretty much the only one. This movie reeks of the 2000s, it's trying to be so cool but winds up being really awkward in the beginning. It feels like a 40 something in 2001 wrote a script based on what they think video games and game development is like and it shows. This feels like it belongs on G4TV or something.

After the first twenty minutes though, I either got used to the awkwardness or it tones it down a lot because I began to enjoy this film. The characters may be caricatures, but they…

Review by Ohhhboyyy ★★★

Falloween 2021

If you like your Lawnmower Man and your Johnny Mnemonic, surely you could spare some love for this extremely dopey TV movie about a video game monster that possesses a mocap suit and starts killing people. The characters in this are GOOFY. The devs are: an extreme version of a movie nerd named Bug, a "cool" smart guy that talks exclusively in big dog sentences named Sol, and a tall guy named Hardcore who brings his melee weapons to work. Clea DuVall is the intern and is extremely normal by comparison, so obviously she's your main protagonist. When their mainframe gets struck by lightning and their code is "inverted", their motion capture suit comes to life, killing people…

Review by Kyle B. ★★½ 4

Definitely not a product made for longevity as it's a low budget flick involving videogame development. This probably looked dated before it was even released. The horribly rendered Pikachu monsters are pretty funny though. But where the digital effects really lack, the practical effects and costumes are...decent. Julie Strain shows up for a topless mo-cap session, so that's cool. There is an edgy early 2000s montage of attrocity photos and footage as only the early internet could provide as a programer "educates" an AI chip about violence or some shit. A lightning strike sends the project off the rails--are they playing the game or is the game playing them?

The trailers before this put a lot of trash on my…

Review by emilyrugburn ★★★ 4

Digital, digital get down , just you and me We may be twenty-thousand miles away But I can see ya And baby, baby, you can see me Digital, digital get down, just what we need If we can't get together naturally Then we can, we can get together On the digital screen

Review by My God's kitten ★★★½

This feels like the good-bad sort of horror I loved to rent in the 90s and I would like to place it on my blu-ray shelves next to Brainscan. The monster is surprisingly creepy. I love how he goes around plucking dead body parts off of his victims to make his look. I wish they still made schlock like this.

Watched with Jason.

Similar Films

Select your preferred backdrop

Select your preferred poster.

Den of Geek

The Den Of Geek guide to making a scary movie monster

Here are ten rules for making a movie monster that will leave audiences screaming in the aisles…

• Share on Facebook (opens in a new tab)
• Share on Twitter (opens in a new tab)
• Share on Linkedin (opens in a new tab)
• Share on email (opens in a new tab)

For every genuinely menacing screen monster, there are at least a dozen unintentionally funny, shambling travesties. For every Giger-designed Alien , there’s a legion of creatures like the rubbery octopus-type thing from Yog: Monster From Space , or the man in a bear suit from Robot Monster .

Here, then, is the Den Of Geek guide to creating a scary movie monster, and a few examples of the pitfalls you should avoid.

A lack of eyes is scary

Ad – content continues below

Designed by H.R. Giger, the titular xenomorph from 1979’s Alien is arguably one of the most disturbing creatures ever to grace the big screen, quite possibly due to its apparent lack of eyes. And while Giger’s monster has suffered from over-exposure in recent years (not to mention its appearance in the woeful Aliens Vs Predator movies), its original incarnation is still an iconic design.

Equally worthy of note is the terrifying Pale Man from Pan’s Labyrinth , a hairless monstrosity that, while not strictly speaking eyeless, was made all the more unnerving by the fact that its eyes were located on the palms of its hands. Once seen, it’s a creature that’s hard to cleanse from your mind.

Inanimate objects definitely aren’t scary

It may be cheap to make the central antagonist in your sci-fi/horror/fantasy flick an inanimate object, but the results are typically about as scary as a cress sandwich.

For evidence, take a look at The Mangler (featuring a killer clothes press), The Lift (a head-lopping elevator), Death Bed (a bed) or, worst of all, Amityville: It’s About Time (haunted cuckoo clock)…

Don’t make your monster allergic to water

Get the best of Den of Geek delivered right to your inbox!

In 2002’s Signs , M. Night Shyamalan artfully built up a suspenseful, low key alien invasion drama, only to throw all that carefully wrought tension away in the final reel by revealing that the invading aggressors could be defeated by simply pouring a vase of water over them.

There’s definitely a lesson to be learned here. If you introduce a formidable monster (or invading army of them) into your cinematic masterpiece, be sure to make it a worthy opponent for your protagonists. If it transpires that a toddler could kill the beast by upsetting a cup of water, your script probably needs a hefty revision.

Don’t make your monster sexy

The evidence is there to be seen throughout cinema’s long history:  sexy monsters aren’t scary. From the big-haired creature in Bride Of Frankenstein , to Natasha Henstridge’s predatory female alien in the 1995 potboiler Species , comely monsters seldom make frightening ones.

In Tobe Hooper’s weird 1985 sci-fi horror, Lifeforce , its female space vampire (played by a lithe Mathilda May) spent almost the entire film wandering around draining the energy out of her unwitting victims.

Any possible tension this scenario could have built up is perpetually undercut by the fact that May spends the entire film profoundly naked, thus making Lifeforce a memorable film for all the wrong reasons.

Never make your monster wear a diving helmet

If the remarkably inept 1953 sci-fi classic Robot Monster has taught us anything, it’s that you need more than a diving helmet and a bear suit to create a scary cinematic creature. Shot for $16,000 dollars, the film ranks alongside Plan 9 From Outer Space as one of the most unintentionally funny films ever made.

Don’t make your monster furry

Werewolves may be a horror staple, but how many lycanthrope-based movies are actually scary? Not many, we’d argue. For every American Werewolf In London or Dog Soldiers , which both managed to be funny and frightening, there are dozens of films like Howling III: The Marsupials and the hilariously awful Project: Metalbeast , which starred the legendary Kane Hodder as a particularly wobbly bullet-proof werewolf.

Then there are the assorted furry creatures of the long-running Critters series, which were more cute than frightening, or the titular menace of The Killer Shrews , which looked like refugees from Bagpuss …

Do play on primal fears

The best movie monsters, regardless of shape, all tap into some basic fear in our collective subconscious. Creatures that play on our anxieties about birth, death and disease are a particular favourite, and director David Cronenberg spent much of his early career quietly pushing his audience’s buttons with a succession of ickily convincing monstrosities, from the maggot-like plague bearers of Shivers to the murderous progeny of The Brood .

Then there’s the genuinely grotesque, shape-shifting beast at the centre of John Carpenter’s classic The Thing . A creeping embodiment of death, disease, and violent identity theft, it’s a horrifying cinema creation, made all the more scary by the fact that we never get to see its true form.

Latest Movie reviews

Maxxxine review: ti west and mia goth embrace ‘80s camp, beverly hills cop: axel f review – eddie murphy still is hollywood's top cop, kinds of kindness review: yorgos lanthimos and emma stone let freak flag fly.

Humans often make the scariest monsters

There are times when all the prosthetics, fake blood and long teeth in the world can’t compare to the sheer terror that a well trained actor can bring to the screen. Characters such as Hannibal Lecter, No Country For Old Men ‘s Anton Chigurh, Blue Velvet ‘s Frank Booth, or even The Exorcist ‘s possessed Regan may not be monsters in the strictest sense, but they’re arguably as scary as anything even the most talented effects artist could create.

Don’t give the creature too much screen time

This is the number one, absolute cardinal rule: keep your monster under the cover of darkness for as long as you possibly can.

Spielberg kept his unconvincing rubber shark submerged for much of the duration of Jaws , while Ridley Scott was shrewd enough to recognise that, if you saw a full frontal shot of his otherwise terrifying monster in Alien , you’d immediately realise it was a mere man in a suit.

Even Matt Reeves, with all the 21st century computer trickery at his disposal for Cloverfield , was wise enough to keep his weird Large Scale Aggressor under cover of darkness for much of the film.

Darkness covers a multitude of sins. And in any case, the threat of something terrible is infinitely more frightening than the sight of the terrible thing itself. Just think how scary 1957’s The Giant Claw could have been had it kept its vulture-like monster in the dark instead of fully exposed…

Ryan Lambie

‘A Quiet Place: Day One’ Review: Alien Invasion Prequel Arrives Full of Sound and Fury, Signifying Nothing

Instead of providing answers or much in the way of suspense, director Michael Sarnoski’s contribution stars Lupita Nyong'o as a terminally ill cat owner tiptoeing through a mostly off-screen apocalypse.

By Peter Debruge

Peter Debruge

Chief Film Critic

• Giving Voice to the New Hollywood Revolution, ‘Chinatown’ and ‘Shampoo’ Writer Robert Towne Brought Honesty to Artifice 10 hours ago
• ‘The Imaginary’ Review: What’s a Pretend Friend to Do When His Human Creator Outgrows Him? 5 days ago
• ‘A Quiet Place: Day One’ Review: Alien Invasion Prequel Arrives Full of Sound and Fury, Signifying Nothing 6 days ago

Related Stories

With a data licensing framework in play, rights holders can embrace ai , zhang xinyang's 'cold water' is hot pick at shanghai film project market, popular on variety.

As it happens, director John Krasinski’s excellent 2020 sequel flashed back to Day One, revealing the pandemonium the aliens’ arrival caused for unsuspecting humans, before jumping forward more than a year in the “Quiet Place” chronology. In theory, what “Day One” promises — but doesn’t actually deliver — is a more expansive look at the mayhem. Most of the action occurs off-screen, and no one (not even the authorities) so much as attempts to fight back.

What about cats? Is Frodo ever really at risk? For the curious, Sarnoski includes a tough-to-decipher scene where a trio of aliens feed on what looks like a feathered version of the ovomorphs from “Alien.” Perhaps this explains why the Death Angels are so aggro: They didn’t pack enough snacks for their intergalactic mission, and Earth doesn’t have what they need. But what do they want?

Produced by Jerry Bruckheimer, “Day One” is served up as a disaster movie, à la Roland Emmerich’s “Independence Day,” with money shots of the Brooklyn Bridge collapsing into the East River and deserted streets that suggest “I Am Legend” by way of 9/11. Where did everybody go? “Day One” makes it look like just a few hundred people call Manhattan home. Surely New York would be crawling with residents, pouring out of the skyscrapers and into the streets, or else retreating into their apartments. It’s Day One of the invasion, and the city is a ghost town.

It’s kind of a fluke that Samira agreed to come along for a field trip to a Manhattan marionette theater, led by a nurse (Alex Wolff) who should have worn quieter clothes. When the aliens land, they immediately start picking off the noisiest humans. Scream, and you’re toast. Call out for your missing partner or child, and a Death Angel is guaranteed to spring from off-screen and rip you in half. While the characters try their best to keep silent, the film’s sound designers do the opposite, using low tones to make the whole theater rumble (Imax and 4DX viewers can literally feel the attack unfolding off-screen).

In the two previous films, the thrill came from watching how characters reacted to these sinewy, double-jointed monsters, whose rattling, Venom-looking heads fold open in a series of flaps as they stop to listen. The terrifying creatures can’t see, but their sense of hearing is hyper-acute, which is why our world went quiet . For some reason, all that stuff it took humans 474 days to learn in the other movies is already known by the characters in this one (like using running water to confound the aliens).

As Samira hides out in the marionette theater with a crowd of strangers (including Djimon Hounsou, the film’s lone connection to the previous installment), military choppers fly overhead, broadcasting instructions: Keep silent. Stay off the bridges. Carefully make your way to the South Street Seaport, where ships are standing by to evacuate people. As an inexplicably small crowd of survivors move south, Samira and Frodo walk in the opposite direction. She wants that pizza.

Through it all, she remains more committed to protecting her cat — which is ironic, since the animal seems all but guaranteed to attract the wrong kind of attention. It is Frodo who finds Eric and leads him to Samira. Their instant bond feels contrived, though a more charitable viewer might be moved by this nothing-to-lose connection between two lonely souls — what writer-director Lorene Scafaria called “Seeking a Friend for the End of the World.”

To his credit, Sarnoski orchestrates a few high-tension set-pieces. But there aren’t nearly enough of these for a movie set in the “Quiet Place” world, as Sarnoski (who put Nicolas Cage through all kinds of nonsensical behavior in “Pig”) winds up putting sentimentality ahead of suspense.

Just compare these movies to the century’s best zombie franchise: “A Quiet Place” ranks up there with “28 Days Later” in its immersive, world-turned-upside-down intrigue. “Part II” was bigger and scarier, à la “28 Weeks Later.” “Day One” ought to have been the mind-blowing origin story, and instead it’s a Hallmark movie, where everyone seems to have nine lives — not just that darn cat.

Reviewed at AMC The Grove, Los Angeles, June 26, 2024. MPA Rating: PG-13. Running time:

• Production: A Paramount Pictures release and presentation, in association with Michael Bay, of a Platinum Dunes, Sunday Night production. Producers: Michael Bay, Andrew Form, Brad Fuller, John Krasinski. Executive producers: Allyson Seeger, Vicki Dee Rock.
• Crew: Director: Michael Sarnoski. Screenplay: Michael Sarnoski; story: John Krasinski, Michael Sarnoski, based on characters created by Bryan Woods & Scott Beck. Camera: Pat Scola. Editors: Andrew Mondshein, Gregory Plotkin. Music: Alexis Grapsas.
• With: Lupita Nyong’o, Joseph Quinn, Alex Wolff, Djimon Hounsou.

More from Variety

How the cast of ‘the acolyte’ trained to become jedi masters: ‘we had to run them through the gamut’, summer movie meltdown math: years of box office data reveal discouraging trends, ‘the boys’ star tomer capone on frenchie’s sexuality and relationship with colin: it’s ‘not black or white, it’s somewhere in between’, ‘interview with the vampire’ team on the finale’s big reunion and how season 3 will feel like it’s been ‘taken hostage by lestat’, peak tv: here’s how deep streamers cut originals output in 1h 2024, ‘vanderpump rules’ ep alex baskin denies cast claims of interference, addresses future of the show , more from our brands, 10 dyson airwrap alternatives that are just as great as the real thing, this custom platinum cartier tank cintrée blew our minds, grambling state athlete seeks hbcu class status in ncaa bias suit, the best loofahs and body scrubbers, according to dermatologists, outer range cancelled at prime video, verify it's you, please log in.

To revisit this article, visit My Profile, then View saved stories .

Bella Hadid Wears the Naked Dress to End All Naked Dresses

Anthony Vaccarello finally figured out how to reproduce his collection of ultra-sheer pantyhose dresses. Bella Hadid hit Cannes in look seven from the Saint Laurent fall 2024 show: a halter dress featuring 10 denier hosiery cups, a knotted pantyhose bodice, and a below-the-knee skirt with a control top hemline.

Hadid, styled by Molly Dickson, leaned into the Old Hollywood glamour that has become synonymous with the Cannes Film Festival, adding a pair of mahogany peep-toe ankle strap heels and an enormous pair of drop earrings from Chopard.

This look fits into Hadid’s latest sartorial M.O. of sheer earthy tones that can only be described as “sexy nymph.” While promoting her fragrance, Orebella, in New York, the model wore a diaphanous nude Dior slip dress by John Galliano, as well as a cream-colored Rokh dress with a lace bodice. And yesterday in Cannes, she further explored brown tones in a simple tank dress . But this look—with only some extremely well-placed seams preserving her modesty—is by far her boldest to date.

When asked about how he would manufacture these ephemeral pieces from the collection, Vaccarello told Vogue, “Don’t even ask me about production—I can’t tell you.” This being the first instance the delicate outfits have been spotted on the red carpet speaks to Hadid’s risk-taking style. Even if she is the only person who ever wears one of these sheer Saint Laurent looks out in the world (let’s see if she can make it to the end of the night without any snags) the fact that Vaccarello was readily willing to make one for her speaks to Hadid’s immense power in the fashion industry.

And if this is Hadid’s wardrobe for her first official day of events in Cannes? We can only imagine what’s to come.

More Great Fashion Stories from Vogue

Lily Collins Has Found a French-Girl Alternative to the Adidas Samba

Meghan Markle’s New Look Is Taking Shape for Spring

Angelina Jolie Will Wear This Pair of Shoes Anywhere—Even a Shopping Run

Katie Holmes’s Baggy Slip Dress Is a Lazy Girl’s Shortcut to Cool

Goodbye, Manolos! Sarah Jessica Parker’s Unlikely Summer Shoe Is a Clog

Rihanna Gives a ’90s Coat a Totally 2024 Feel

Sign up for Vogue Shopping to receive the insider’s guide to what to shop and how to wear it

Listen to The Run-Through with Vogue , a weekly podcast featuring the most exciting stories and hot takes from the worlds of culture, politics, sports and–of course–fashion

Never miss a Vogue moment and get unlimited digital access for just $2 $1 per month.

Vogue Daily

By signing up you agree to our User Agreement (including the class action waiver and arbitration provisions ), our Privacy Policy & Cookie Statement and to receive marketing and account-related emails from Vogue. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Screen Rant

A quiet place: day one review - john krasinski's horror franchise has officially overstayed its welcome.

Your changes have been saved

Email Is sent

Please verify your email address.

You’ve reached your account maximum for followed topics.

How Much A Quiet Place: Day One Cost To Make & What Box Office It Needs

A quiet place: day one box office surpasses major global milestone, where eric is in a quiet place 2 after escaping on the boat with frodo in day one addressed by director.

• A Quiet Place: Day One lacks emotional depth and creativity, with a weak storyline and underdeveloped characters.
• Lupita Nyong'o's strong performance can't save the film from its lack of tension and scares.
• The alien creatures lose their impact, and become less scary and intriguing.

A Quiet Place is a movie I never thought I’d see expanded into a full franchise, but it might have been better if it’d remained a standalone. A Quiet Place: Day One , which, as its title suggests, explores the first arrival of the noise-sensitive aliens to Earth, is interesting for a bit before coming to a nearly complete standstill creatively. Starring a stellar Lupita Nyong’o, who carries the emotional weight of the film, Day One has the depth of paper and less effective scares and tension than either of the first two movies.

A Quiet Place: Day One

Directed and written by Michael Sarnoski, from a story by him and A Quiet Place director John Krasinski , Day One follows Sam (Nyong’o), who lives in hospice care and is dying from cancer. She’s stranded in New York City after a day trip turns into a nightmare following the alien creature’s arrival. From there, the story primarily centers on survival, though Sam, along with her new friend Eric ( Stranger Things' Joseph Quinn ), a fearful law student, really wants to get the pizza she was promised. I would’ve laughed at the pizza bit had the movie not taken it so seriously.

Lupita Nyong'o Doesn't Disappoint In A Quiet Place: Day One

Day One started out strong enough, and it was easy for me to get invested in Sam thanks to Nyong’o’s sorrowful eyes and wit. Sam is a woman who is tired of waiting for death to come, but must wait anyway. Nyong’o’s face is eternally expressive, giving us insight into Sam’s emotions and state of mind despite a script that refuses to rise to her talents. Emotionally, the actress does most of the heavy lifting. I wanted her to get her pizza as much as she did, even if I also got tired of hearing about it.

Nyong’o puts a lot more effort into her role than the story offers, but she can’t save the film from becoming sluggish. Quinn, for his part, is fine. Certainly, he’s no match for his scene partner, and his character is rather bland with little depth. Therein lies the problem: Day One doesn’t offer much in the way of emotional depth, and thus there’s no anchor to fully keep the film afloat. The characters are thinly drawn and can’t match the tension, effectiveness, or feeling that is built into the original A Quiet Place .

A Quiet Place: Day One has a fairly large budget and needs to earn quite a bit at the box office to turn a profit, but it could easily be a success.

A Quiet Place: Day One Doesn’t Offer Anything New Or Intriguing

The monster aliens are somehow less scary here.

The aliens in the first movie were terrifying, creeping into scenes and putting everyone on edge. That sense of danger and fear is almost entirely lost in Day One . In fact, the aliens appear so often, and are not as sensitive to noise as the first two movies made them out to be, that they lose their impact. It’s only the initial alien landing in NYC that properly builds intensity and eeriness.

Sam, trapped in the middle of the street and surrounded by dust and debris from a nearby explosion, can’t see around her; the scene is disorienting, shot in a way that confuses and heightens the genuine fear that is absent throughout the rest of the film. It’s the only truly disconcerting scene in a movie that doesn’t know how to evolve its horror. Beyond that, the film doesn’t introduce anything new about the hostile creatures. It retreads what we already know about them and manages to somehow flatten them as antagonists.

Unfortunately, the film doesn’t invest in its characters or in its world beyond the surface, so why should we?

In some instances, the logical inconsistencies are hard to ignore because Day One commits one of the worst movie crimes — it becomes stagnant to the point of being dull. About an hour into the film, I felt myself becoming detached from the story, lulled into exhaustion by a slow pace and an insubstantial, weak storyline. The fact that Sam’s cat managed to stay quiet the whole time is impressive, but even I grew tired of watching it run around the city. It’s as though Sarnoski was killing time between the film’s big moments, which lost their momentum and payoff.

A Quiet Place: Day One had potential, but it squanders some of its goodwill early on and never recovers. It’s a tension-free viewing experience that leaves a lot to be desired. Nyong’o puts in a solid performance, and the feeling of coming alive again when one’s body and the world around them is deteriorating is effectively communicated. Unfortunately, the film doesn’t invest in its characters or in its world beyond the surface, so why should we?

A Quiet Place: Day One releases in theaters Friday, June 28. The film is rated PG-13 for terror and violent content/bloody images.

A Quiet Place: Day One is a spin-off of the A Quiet Place franchise conceived by John Krasinski. The film is set at the beginning of the invasion as humanity scrambles to survive, before the events of the original film, with Lupita Nyong'O leading the cast, directed by Michael Sarnoski.

• Lupita Nyong'o excellently brings the emotion to her role
• The story's pacing is slow and the story exhausting
• The script is thin and lacks tension
• The alien creatures don't have a strong impact

This Jesse Plemons Folk Horror Movie Features a Terrifying Mythical Monster

Your changes have been saved

Email Is sent

Please verify your email address.

You’ve reached your account maximum for followed topics.

The Big Picture

• Antlers is a creature feature and folk horror movie based on Nick Antosca's short story "The Quiet Boy."
• The wendigo creature design, created by director Scott Cooper, producer Guillermo del Toro, and the team, is visually engaging and frightening.
• The film, which stars Jesse Plemons and Keri Russell, combines folk horror with social commentary on addiction and small-town America's struggles.

Mixed in with all the brightly colored art-house horror movies of the last few years is Scott Cooper ’s 2021 Antlers . Based on Nick Antosca ’s 2019 short story, " The Quiet Boy ," Antlers is a classic creature feature and folk horror mash-up . The movie follows a teacher, Julia Meadows ( Keri Russell ), and her police chief brother, Paul Meadows ( Jesse Plemons ), as they investigate what at first appears to be a child abuse case. However, as the case unfolds, the Meadows siblings discover that the culprit isn't a cruel parent but an otherworldly monster . Having worked with Guillermo del Toro on creating the creature's design, Cooper delivers not only a fearsome monster but a visually engaging one. Watching Antlers is like reading an old Stephen King novel. The world is gritty, and the monster is properly frightening, but there is a human element at the heart of the story. It’s terrifying but impossible to look away from.

Guillermo del Toro Helped Design the ‘Antlers’ Wendigo Creature

There is a fine line in monster movies. It doesn’t matter how many bodies the creature has left behind or how impressive the sound design is. If the monster looks campy or unsophisticated, the audience stops being afraid the minute it appears in full. Antlers’ wendigo beats these odds and delivers an actually frightening-looking monster . A small team made up of director Scott Cooper, concept designer Guy Davis , producer Shane Mahan , and producer and horror legend Guillermo del Toro , conceived the wendigo’s look.

In a 2022 interview with the Stan Winston School of Character Arts , the team explained they wanted to pay special attention to the wendigo’s Native American origins and incorporate “elements of the earth.” Halfway through the film, the Meadows siblings go to former police chief, Warren Stokes ( Graham Green ), for help identifying the wendigo. While Paul dismisses the wendigo as a folklore monster, Stokes reminds him that the wendigo is not a myth to him or his people. The script acknowledges the origins of the wendigo, but the physical design of the creature hammers it home.

For the “elements of the earth,” the team was especially drawn to the appearance of iron ore and the earth’s core. The final result is a triumph. Just before the human fully transforms into the wendigo, their chest glows. Once the transformation is complete, the human body looks like, and is described as, “a burned-out shell.” Throughout the movie, it's suggested that the wendigo is nesting in the mine and the creature is first introduced in an abandoned mine shaft. The appearance of burning in the wendigo’s design fleshes the creature out. Combined with Stokes’ warning that the wendigo is real, the audience can believe that the wendigo of Antlers exists and lives in the wooded area outside this ordinary small town.

‘Antlers’ Combines Folk Horror With Current Social Commentary

Antlers distinguishes itself from other visually engaging horror movies released the same year. Rather than the electric coloring of Titane , Antlers leans into the dark coloring of traditional horror . Establishing shots interspersed throughout the film are of remote, wooded areas and swaths of still water. Everything is set in a cool, muted color palate, often with a heavy, rolling fog. The eerie tranquility and fog are evocative of the iconic visuals in 2006’s Silent Hill . The coloring and physical setting of Antlers , however, is on par with Catherine Hardwicke ’s moody 2008 adaptation of Twilight . The Pacific Northwest is a criminally underused backdrop in horror cinema. Antlers uses its Oregon setting to wash the majority of the movie in cool blues and grays. In doing so, Antlers feels like a winter movie, permanently caught in the cold. This atmosphere is pointedly juxtaposed with the wendigo’s association with burning and heat. In the final showdown of the film, Julie ignites a flare. The spitting red fire and infernal glow of the wendigo’s chest stand out in the cool, misting air.

Guillermo del Toro Helps Create the Wendigo in 'Antlers' Featurette

A blind, man-eating monster? Created by GdT? No way!

The small-town, Americana vibe of Antlers is only strengthened through Cooper's utilization of cultural markers woven throughout the film. Wooden shacks, convenience stores, and abandoned mine shafts-turned-meth-labs take up several of the sets. Homemade charms meant to repel the wendigo hang in the mine shaft. These little details come together for a palpable folk horror vibe. The opioid epidemic is referenced several times, with Julie listening to a statistics report on the radio and Paul frequently taking pills of no clear origin. While there is deference to the wendigo’s origin, Cooper also uses the monster as a shorthand for addiction . The first victim to succumb to the wendigo is Frank Weaver, an addict who runs the meth lab in the abandoned mine. Paul’s pill habit is unspoken throughout the film, but he ultimately becomes the final victim of the wendigo. The destructive nature of the wendigo mirrors that of drug addiction, with those infected by the wendigo described as “hollowed out” and “shells.”

Jesse Plemons’ Performance in the Final Scene of ‘Antlers’ Will Give You Chills

Antlers closes the movie out on an unnerving note. Utilizing a calm lake backdrop, with Julia and Paul peaceably watching Lucas by the water, the audience is primed to believe this piecemeal family may heal. With the wendigos defeated and the three united, there is hope for them yet. Except Antlers is unrelenting in its dread as it reveals that Paul has been infected by the wendigo . Jesse Plemons plays this final scene brilliantly . The last bit of dialogue is between Julia and Paul, “Could you kill something you love?” with Julia never verbally answering. As she walks away, Paul’s eyes begin to leak black goo. He coughs up a similar blackish blood into his hand and stares off after Julia. Julia’s lack of answer hangs heavy over Paul and the audience. Plemons’ entire face twists, with micro-expressions of panic and fear. And yet, his fear is not of becoming a wendigo. Paul never saw the wendigo, as he was attacked from behind at his house and was absent from the final showdown. Instead, he fears Julia, who has shown she has the strength and grit to do what must be done.

Antlers makes great use of its monster. Once the wendigo appears on-screen, the audience is desperate to see more of it. It fits in with the film's environment, feeling like a natural byproduct of the woodsy setting. But more than that, the wendigo is representative of horrors facing much of small-town America today. Cooper’s wendigo represents familial abuse through the backstory of the Meadows siblings and addiction, as seen through Frank Weaver and Paul, as well as drug addiction that plagues the small town. Julia does her very best to take down the monster, but it is not enough. The wendigo has found another host — in the person most dear to her, no less. The final scene trades out the traditional jump scares and loud noises for an impossible-to-shake sensation of complete and utter dread.

Antlers is available to rent on Amazon in the U.S.

Rent on Amazon

• Movie Features

The hardware overclocking specialists at Teclab had been at it again by modifying GPUs for increased performance and have created a monster. This time around the team from Brazil has taken an AD103 GPU for a GeForce RTX 4090 and mounted it on a custom RTX 3090 Ti PCB and then paired it with overclocked GDDR6X memory for a GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER. Now while this may seem like a bit of a Frankenstein creation, it does allow the AD103 GPU to stretch its legs and significantly outperform the stock version.

The hardware overclocking specialists at Teclab must have a connection with overseas graphics card manufacturer GALAX because they have previously made similar creations using GALAX PCBs. For this project, they have sourced a GALAX RTX 3090 Ti HOF OC Lab Edition which includes 2 x 12HPWR 16-pin connectors and features an impressive 28-phase VRM design. Now while a GeForce RTX 4090 uses 21 Gbps GDDR6X the team has instead opted for the 22.4 Gbps memory found on RTX 4080 SUPER. That memory is rated for 22.4 Gbps and the team used binned 24 Gbps modules and managed to overclock it to 25.8 Gbps. Lastly, a waterblock connected to an LN2 canister, to cool it.

Per WccfTech :

“ But things aren’t as simple as they seem, there are other changes required to be made to get everything to work and these include modified strap settings, BIOS, and changing the power supply project from 1.8V to 1.2V (External).”

Testing Results

This “RTX 4090 SUPER” was tested at 8K resolution with the Unienine Superposition benchmark test. The modded card already managed a 13% performance uptick at stock settings. With the GPU overclocked to over 3 GHz and memory running at an effective 25.8 Gbps, the card’s performance greatly increased to 39.9% over the stock RTX 4090. This essentially has the card performing to the rumored generational increases of the GeForce RTX 5090.

RTX 5090 and 4090 Ti/SUPER Rumors

There have been many rumors about the memory specifications for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090. At this point, it is kind of all over the map but one such rumor suggests 512-bit 28 Gbps memory. Meanwhile, rumors about a 4090 Ti, or 4090 SUPER have floated around since before the launch of the RTX 40 series and further substantiated by images of what are believed to have been prototype coolers and other parts. It seems, at this point, NVIDIA has truly abandoned upgrading from the current flagship and is instead placing its focus on the forthcoming Blackwell GPU lineup. Given how close in performance a heavily modified 4090 can get to the rumored specs of the next flagship, this does make sense.

• GeForce RTX 3090 Ti
• GeForce RTX 4090
• GeForce RTX 4090 SUPER

Recent News

Final fantasy creator has no interest in returning to the franchise or bringing older games to modern platforms, playstation’s lead designer is “very surprised” by the popularity of ray tracing and how gamers prefer higher frame rates, radeon rx 7600 leads amd gpu sales in south korea, playstation stars will be returning soon in phased regional rollouts, sony confirms, dead space returns this month as part of a new time-limited battlefield 2042 mode.

Email address:

• © 2022 DCS Reviews, LLC.
• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy

Advertisement

Supported by

News Analysis

Russia Sends Waves of Troops to the Front in a Brutal Style of Fighting

More than 1,000 Russian soldiers in Ukraine were killed or wounded on average each day in May, according to NATO and Western military officials.

• Share full article

By Julian E. Barnes ,  Eric Schmitt and Marc Santora

Julian E. Barnes and Eric Schmitt reported from Washington, and Marc Santora from Kyiv, Ukraine.

May was a particularly deadly month for the Russian army in Ukraine, with an average of more than 1,000 of its soldiers injured or killed each day, according to U.S., British and other Western intelligence agencies.

But despite its losses, Russia is recruiting 25,000 to 30,000 new soldiers a month — roughly as many as are exiting the battlefield, U.S. officials said. That has allowed its army to keep sending wave after wave of troops at Ukrainian defenses, hoping to overwhelm them and break through the trench lines.

It is a style of warfare that Russian soldiers have likened to being put into a meat grinder, with commanding officers seemingly oblivious to the fact that they are sending infantry soldiers to die.

At times, this approach has proved effective, bringing the Russian army victories in Avdiivka and Bakhmut in eastern Ukraine. But Ukrainian and Western officials say the tactics were less successful this spring, as Russia tried to take land near the city of Kharkiv.

American officials said that Russia achieved a critical objective of President Vladimir V. Putin, creating a buffer zone along the border to make it more difficult for the Ukrainians to strike into the country.

But the drive did not threaten Kharkiv and was ultimately stopped by Ukrainian defenses, according to Western officials.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .