Monk, le retour

For those saying Monk acts like a cartoonish two year old- you are missing the point of the show. I am a therapist who also suffers from OCD so I have personal and professional knowledge in mental health diagnosis. Usually I hate portrayal of mental health diagnosis in television and movies because it's portrayed inaccurately and mostly does more harm than good in stigma. However, Monk is one of the only exceptions. Monk walks the line of making fun of a disease that takes the joy out of most things without mocking it. Besides some exaggerations (which is to be expected in a TV show); Monk is mostly accurate in its representation. OCD is multifaceted- there's 4 types that present differently for each person (Monk displays all 4 types). I couldn't be more different than Monk yet somehow, felt understood. It made conversations about OCD easier to have with my family and friends. I was able to show them things I felt that I found hard to explain myself. Sometimes the intrusive and repetitive thoughts can be so loud it is hard to concentrate on anything else. This explains why Monk displays erratic, selfish and sometimes, annoying behavior (much like a 2 year old). If you understand this show, if you love, miss and wish it was on for more seasons- this movie is for you. If not, skip it. P. S- while Psych and Monk have some overlapping features, they are different shows and should be treated as such. If you like the Psych movies/ show that doesn't mean you'll like Monk and vice versa. To compare them is a disservice to both shows.

Bon film !

Bon film !

Bon film !

Bon film !

I'm a die-hard Monk fan and eagerly awaited this movie. However, I was disappointed to see the depressive turn the writers took with Monk's character. As another reviewer wrote, I too would have loved to see Monk embracing how the world dealt with germs during the Covid-19 pandemic. Mr. Monk gleefully witnessing the world wearing masks, using sanitizers amd wipes would have been hilarious. It seemed as if the writers weren't aware of the subtle nuances that make Monk "Monk". All in all, It was an enjoyable hour and a half. I loved seeing the old crew back together but it definitely missed its mark.

I am a Monk fan and Tony Shalhoub didn't disappoint. He was, as always, a delight to watch. But most of the other actors were mediocre, especially McGee, whose grief was not at all convincing. Even Ted Levine was unconvincing in his conflict of interests. The story had such a great potential if each actor had tackled into it and had taken their role as seriously as Shalhoub. Except for Monk's wife, everyone seemed to be there just to create a background for Monk. I earnestly hope this is not Monk's last case, not only because I will gladly watch more of Monk any time but also because he deserves a better "last case," if there has to be one.

The good: Tony Shalhoub's acting performance is great. As ever I must say, because this actor has got a special talent for playing characters who are masterful at fumbling things up, making a fool out of themselves, in such an endearing way that I can only sympathize with his characters. And this movie aint no different, although it looks and feels more like a television pilot than a real movie, which brings me to the bad... The bad: this movies' other actors are quite mediocre. And unfortunately they do get a lot of screentime and dialogue. It almost seems as if Tony Shalhoub got all the great lines and the other characters got only "filler" dialogue. The scenes with Tony Shalhoub were a delight to watch, but the many other scenes kinda bored me to be honest. Not terrible for certain, but not great either. It'll do as a nice pastime for those who are into slowburing, quirky, gentle detective stories. The story: Tony Shalhoub plays a neurotic detective, who visits his shrink frequently and who has got many kinds of fears. Despite all these hilariously looking shortcomings and witty scenes about his anxious outlook on his personal life he simultaneously has to solve a complex murder case. Will he succeed or run back to his shrink asking for more pills and understanding?

Adrian Monk returns with even more OCD than he had when the regular show started back in 2002. Having had a difficult time during the Covid pandemic. His various ailments and neurosis have relapsed. Facing financial difficulties when his book deal falls through. All the publisher had to do was get the ghostwriter to write the book. Monk is upset that he would not be able to pay for Molly, his stepdaughter's wedding. However it never goes that far. Her fiancé, Griffin an investigative journalist is killed in a bungee jumping accident. Only Molly thinks it is murder. He had ruffled the feathers of tech billionaire Rick Eden (James Purefoy) who is preparing to go into space. Griffin implied that he might have killed his business partner. The movie serves as a backdoor pilot. It is just a shame that it is not a good story. Eden is a thinly disguised Bezos rip off but a murdering one. Monk comes across as irritating rather than a brilliant detective with OCD issues.

I haven't watched the show. I understand it's one of those shows with a cult following and it seems like the creators of this movie not only understood it as well, but exploited it to the fullest because the movie, on its own, is weak and borderline a waste of time. I liked Monk's character and backstory, and the ending was emotional and well done, but that's about it. For one, the antagonist is an absolute idiot. And I don't mean it as an offense, but as a fact. He's just, simply, stupid. He does stupid things in a stupid way with stupid motivation and an utterly stupid plan. An idiot. And the creators seem to think the audience is, as well. Why else would they have a perp randomly give the crucial hint about the murder right after the murder, at the place of the murder, the thing nobody could possibly know at the time, and say it completely unnecessarily and unwarranted? Why else would they have the villain send the threatening letters written by hand, touched with his own hands and with his saliva on the envelope in a time where fingerprints and DNA are usable in crime investigations? Why? This makes me so angry, seriously 😒 Also, it is said that if the audience knows who did it, at least the "how" should remain a mistery. The thing is, even the "how" is super obvious from the start. To everyone, apparently, but the brilliant detective and his entourage of useless, obviously-only-there-to-cash-in-on-nostalgia side characters. I'm not saying the characters aren't likeable or occasionally funny even, but they're completey irrelevant to anything that's happening. Ah, I know I might be unnecessarily upset, but I'm angry at myself for thinking a high grade reflects the quality :( Also, Monk's condition occasionally seems to only be there to make fun of it? Like when he brought his own sanitizer machine to the court room and then didn't allow anyone else to use it. Why not just bring sanitizer in a bottle? *sigh*