Generally favorable reviews - based on 34 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 30 out of 34
  2. Negative: 0 out of 34
  1. 78
    The spirited interplay between Goodman and Crystal is both wacky and, dare I say, charming.
  2. 88
    The movie may not be perfect, but it's jam-packed with goodies -- like a breakfast cereal fun-pack with a prize on every box-top.
  3. Reviewed by: Jay Carr
    By any other standard, the creatures in Monsters, Inc. would be impressive. But by the high standard Pixar not only set itself, but invented, they're only ordinary.
  4. It comes from Pixar, the animation studio that scored with the "Toy Story" series and "A Bug's Life," and it has more zip and a tad less soul than those predecessors.
  5. 80
    An unprecedented friendship between a monster and a child leads to an amazing chase scene.
  6. 75
    Monsters, Inc. is cheerful, high-energy fun, and like the other Pixar movies, has a running supply of gags and references aimed at grownups.
  7. 88
    The climax, featuring what's essentially a suspended roller coaster of closet doors, is as thrilling as it is imaginative.
  8. The movie's cutest twist is that the monsters are more scared of kids than kids are of them, because they think human children are toxic.
  9. Monsters, Inc. has got that swing, that zippity, multilevel awareness of kids'-eye sensibilities and adult-pitched humor.
  10. 80
    Confirms that despite all the technical tools at their disposal, one thing counts head and shoulders above razzle-dazzle eye candy (or anything else, for that matter): the story and characters, and Monsters, Inc. introduces worthy additions to the Pixar pantheon.
  11. 100
    The story's charming, the set pieces are wildly inventive, and even the throwaway one-liners, about everything from movie-animation pioneer Ray Harryhausen to the old Oscar Meyer jingle, are hilarious.
  12. Though it has its charms, Monsters, Inc. does not measure up. As a childhood entertainment it is certainly fine, but Pixar's celebrated lure for adults is largely absent.
  13. 88
    Movies like Monsters, Inc. literally make you feel like a kid again, marveling at the joyously inventive sights before you, and that's a feat that should not be taken lightly.
  14. As giddy and antic as any great Warner Bros. cartoon of the 1930s and '40s -- it bears seeing more than once, if only to allow for the sight gags that play second fiddle to the plot, a rarity in animation -- but also resonant and real. In other words, it's the perfect movie.
  15. Rarely does an animated character merge as perfectly with the persona of the actor providing his voice as the star of Monsters, Inc. does with John Goodman.
  16. Much more kid-oriented than any other computer-animated movie thus far. In other words, it's much more Disneyish. I enjoyed it.
  17. 88
    Smart, funny and ingeniously detailed with terrific vocal teamwork.
  18. Reviewed by: David Ansen
    A terrific piece of work: smart, inventive and executed with state-of-the-art finesse.
  19. "Shrek" is a scintilla funnier, "Toy Story 2" a hair's breadth more poignant, but "MI" is every bit as imaginative and lovable as these other contemporary animation classics.
  20. 67
    It's a good movie, mind you, with great bits in it, but it still falls short of rapture.
  21. 100
    It's the Pixar animators who keep grown-ups as riveted as the kids with visual marvels that dazzle and delight.
  22. 70
    It's a nice movie. But Disney has never learned that "nice," especially in comedy, is a negative virtue.
  23. Reviewed by: Carla Meyer
    Funny and sweet enough to delight kids and inventive enough to satisfy adults.
  24. Not quite up to the exalted level of the two predecessors ("Toy Story" and "Toy Story 2"), be assured it's still the most eye-popping and thoroughly entertaining animated film to come down the pike so far this year.
  25. Reviewed by: David Edelstein
    Doesn’t have the warmth of the Toy Story pictures, but it still boasts a very entertaining slapstick-farce structure and some neat hairy, oozy, tendrilly creatures.
  26. 90
    There hasn't been a film in years to use creative energy as efficiently as Monsters, Inc.
  27. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    "Shrek," this film's prime competition for the first Animated Feature Oscar, is a synoptic parody of fairy tales. In Monsters, Inc. the gags aren't as spot-on but the technique is miles ahead. The vision is grander and warmer.
  28. Reviewed by: Frank Lovece
    The funny lines fall flat and the relationships and conversations among adult characters are straight out of 1950s sitcoms. Now that's scary.
  29. Reviewed by: Mike Clark
    Though the comedy is sometimes more frenetic than inspired and viewer emotions are rarely touched to any notable degree, the movie is as visually inventive as its Pixar predecessors.
  30. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    Clever and jokey in a vaudeville sort of way, but lacks the heart and sheer imagination of the company's best work for Disney, "Toy Story 2" and "A Bug's Life."
User Score

Universal acclaim- based on 304 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 88 out of 91
  2. Negative: 2 out of 91
  1. Sep 29, 2011
    "Monsters Inc." is the milestone animation of Pixar's big debut to the 21st century. As expecting, the film is amazing, containing good morals that audience of every age can understand and appeal. Two thumbs up!!! Full Review »
  2. Jun 30, 2011
    It may not be the most sophisticated Pixar film, but is still a fantastic and charming film. The animation is as beautiful and vibrant as even newer animated films. One of the most original concepts for a film I have ever seen, and great voice acting make this a must-see. One of Pixar's best, and also one of all of animations best films. As will all other Pixar movies, animation is not just for children. This is a wittily funny movie for everyone. Full Review »
  3. Aug 6, 2011
    One of the greatest movies I've ever seen. The characters are likeable and the story is original and heartwarming. Disney never fails to entertain both children and adults. Full Review »