AKA: Paksa wayu
Country and Year: Thailand (2004)
Director: Monthon Arayangkoon
Starring: Sara Legge, Sornram Theppitak, Chalad Na Songkla, Daniel Fraser

Review By: David Austin
Rating: 1 out of 4 stars (poor)

Garuda is a slickly produced, but ultimately soulless and empty, monster movie from Thailand. It tries to tap the same vein as CGI beastie flicks like Anaconda and The Relic, but lacks even the vestigial, rudimentary sense of humor and fun those fairly bad movies had. Also, FYI, Garuda is not a kaiju film, so don’t expect any rubber suit fun.

Historically and religiously, Garuda is an eagle deity, the mount of Vishnu, one of the aspects of God in the Hindu religion. The garuda is also the national symbol of Thailand and Indonesia. Odds are you’ve seen the classical image of the garuda gracing some form of art one or twice. However, in this film, Garuda is nothing but a big, evil monster, with little motivation beyond killing whatever members of the cast he comes across. There is a brief attempt at backstory at the beginning of the film, where it is explained that an evil, renegade Garuda was imprisoned by his brethren, but this mythology is never followed up on after the first two minutes. I suppose we are meant to infer that the titular Garuda and that ancient Garuda are one and the same, but it really doesn’t matter. Not to mention that one of the opening scenes indicates that there might be another Garuda in Kashmir. Perhaps our Garuda is just pissed off and homicidal because he’s been stuck in a cave under Bangkok for hundreds of years. I certainly would be.

Garuda could have been fun in one of two ways – it could have been a well-plotted adventure or horror story with interesting characters (see Tremors or Alien), or it could have been an insane freak-out with fun cheesy effects and some local flavor (see Mystics in Bali). However, the filmmakers instead made a competent picture completely lacking in either artistic or camp value. It fails in three main areas.

Strike 1 – the trite plot. The government calls in a team of paramilitary commandos, led by tough-guy Commander Toschai (Sornram Theppitak), to investigate an odd archaeological find in the tunnels under Bangkok. Along for the ride are Leena Pierre (Sara Legge), a sexy half-Thai scientist whose archaeologist father had investigated a previous garuda site under Kashmir, and her comic relief foreign sidekick Tim (Daniel Fraser), who has a bit of a crush on her. So what happens? The scientists and commandos fight, then Garuda wakes up and starts killing people. Eventually, Leena and Toschai develop a respect for each other, pretty much everybody else dies nastily, and Garuda gets whacked.

All the typical monster movie clichés are in effect. Whole battalions open fire on Garuda to no effect, but Toschai’s handgun works great. Boobytraps set for the monster accidentally hurt the heroes. The super bad-ass commandos get wiped out without much trouble.

(Something I was wondering about. While the precautions do eventually turn out to be worthwhile, no indication is ever given why a paramilitary team was called in to deal with a bunch of fossils. In an atypically interesting scene, it is revealed that the team had previously encountered and dealt with a giant snake monster known as a Naga (another holdover from Hindu mythology). This suggests that the paramilitary team is a sort of supernatural hit squad, and perhaps knew in advance that they would encounter a very alive, very angry Garuda. Unfortunately, the film never follows up on this sole potentially interesting plot thread. It’s used simply to illustrate that Toschai is upset because he lost some men in the past. At least I think he was upset - Theppitak really only has one facial expression - a sort of blank-faced scowl.)

Strike 2 – boring characters and relationships. Compare this to Aliens (its most obvious inspiration) where James Cameron made a successful effort to flesh out even the most minor parts. Here, Toschai is completely boring, as are his men. Any one of them could just as easily have been the lead. Leena is an alternating mix of whininess and attitude, and completely unlikeable. There is a by-the-numbers subplot about how she isn’t respected because she is only half-Thai, and people constantly make disparaging comments about her. This might be interesting social commentary if it didn’t feel so artificial - existing solely to create a little tension. And why bring Leena anyway? All they do is ignore her, yell at her, and periodically try to get rid of her. If you’re already predisposed to not care what your token scientist says, why bring her along? (there is only one reason I can think of to bring her along, but that doesn’t seem to be the reason in the movie).

The only thing I will say in favor of Garuda on this score is that the movie is damn tough on its comic relief characters – something I always support. You have to appreciate any movie that allows the monster to eat kids or comic relief characters (see the 1988 remake of The Blob for a good example).

Strike 3 – lame monster and CGI. The Garuda itself, the focus of the film, looks completely dorky. Instead of going for the bright colors of traditional garuda art, the creature designers stuck with a dull low-key look – only the distinctive garuda face helps the monster to stand out from the run-of-the-mill beastie. Plus the designers made it look more like a chicken than the fearsome creature of legend. Worst of all, the creature is entirely CGI, and mediocre CGI at that. Think The Mummy, Anaconda, or The Relic. Except for a few scenes, there’s never any sense that Garuda has real weight or presence, or is interacting with the characters. The movement of the beast is awkward too – overlong arms evoke a gorilla more than a graceful, lean creature. Also, prepare yourself for lots of Garuda Vision, as we look through the creature’s baleful yellow eyes at … nothing of interest.

Ultimately, the main reason the movie fails it because it lacks any sort of a creative spark. Often, in even the worst movies, there is a moment of inspired brilliance or lunacy that stands out, even if it’s surrounded by garbage. Enough of those moments, and you might get a so-bad-its-good movie or even a cult classic. Unfortunately, Garuda doesn’t have a single such moment. It’s not “so bad it’s good” – Garuda is far too professional and slick for that. Rather, it’s just a lame retread of movies we’ve all seen countless times before. The only thing it really has going for it is Sara Legge’s cute face, and that is not enough to justify a second star.

The Thai film industry has undergone remarkable changes in the last several years, and started to produce some interesting films. While there’s been a lot of dreck, like Krai Thong and Killer Tattoo, and some solidly produced if not outstanding movies, like Suriyothai and Bang Rajan, there have also been some interesting and original efforts, like Tears of the Black Tiger, Ong Bak, and Last Life in the Universe. Garuda unfortunately falls into the dreck category. It’s a well-made film, and watching it is not a painful experience (like Izo) but it is utterly lacking in originality or any kind of an interesting catch.

Recommended? No, unless you’re absolutely desperate for a monster film. Garuda isn’t terrible, it’s just entirely derivative and uninteresting.

If you like this, you might like: Predator, Aliens, Gamera 2: Advent of Legion, Deep Blue Sea, Orca, Anaconda, The Relic, 20 Million Miles to Earth. Really, what Garuda most resembles is the crapulent American remake of Godzilla.

© David Austin