J.J. Abrams' Super 8 (2011)

[Morris Schæffer]

Some juicy morcels of info:


We have exclusive details on the trailer (http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/2008-12-6-motion-captured/posts/want-to-know-the-title-of-the-secret-jj-abrams-film?m=k)for the J.J. Abrams–produced Super 8, which will unspool at 12:01 am Thursday night in front of Iron Man 2. We feel compelled to insert a spoiler alert — read no further if you just want it to be a surprise! — lest a livid Cloverfield fan hurl an icy Slusho! (http://www.slusho.jp/) in our direction. Here's what we know for certain ...
Insiders familiar with the trailer tell us that it shows a bunch of kids who are shooting a movie with a Super 8 camera in the seventies or eighties. When they develop the film, they notice that there's an alien creature in the frame. Our sources also say that Super 8 is absolutely connected to 2008's Cloverfield (possibly a prequel, but not a sequel).
Whether the actual Super 8 movie will be set in the seventies, eighties, or present day is anyone's guess. And yet, just this scrap of information will have fans obsessing for months. Advantage yours, Abrams.

[megladon8]

I, for one, can't wait to see this.

[eternity]

I'll go see Iron Man 2 for this.

[Morris Schæffer]

A small description of the trailer:


“In 1970 Area 51 was closed down and everything was shipped to an undisclosed location in Ohio”. Then you see a train carrying lots of cargo loads. Cut to a car driving down the road that jumps up on the tracks and heads straight toward the train. Cut to black screen and then the words “From Director J.J. Abrams”. Then back to the train and car colliding into each other, the the train derails, the camera slowly zooms in on one of the tipped over cargo cars of the derailed train, then something is punching on the walls inside the train cart trying to escape. Cut to black screen and then the title ”Super 8“.

[megladon8]

Damn, J.J. Abrams himself has some out and said this has absolutely nothing to do with Cloverfield.

*sigh*

A man can dream...

[KK2.0]

EW said it's a Steven Spielberg's production with JJ directing, the film seems to be his homage to the sci-fi films he watched as a teenager... http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2010/05/06/j-j-abrams-spielberg-super-8/

[Ivan Drago]

I'm sure this will be awesome, but I'll be interested to see if/how they incorporate the limitations of a super 8 camera.

[megladon8]

I think J.J. Abrams is the very best "idea man" currently working in Hollywood.

[Winston*]

I think J.J. Abrams is the very best "idea man" currently working in Hollywood.
Isn't all his stuff derivative of something or other?

[MadMan]

The teaser was pretty cool, although I'm not sure how this movie will turn out. I'd like to see a longer trailer in the near future.

[Morris Schæffer]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NECsrx7VC3I&feature=player_embedded

The teaser It's a cam, but pretty steady and clear.

[number8]

I think J.J. Abrams is the very best "idea man" currently working in Hollywood.

I'm curious as to why you say this. What are his good ideas?

[megladon8]

I'm curious as to why you say this. What are his good ideas?


His ideas have more to do with how to approach something we've seen before. I find every project I see him associated with involves a very clever, fresh take on whatever subject he's telling a story about.

So maybe he is more of a marketing genius.

[Sven]

His ideas have more to do with how to approach something we've seen before. I find every project I see him associated with involves a very clever, fresh take on whatever subject he's telling a story about.

So maybe he is more of a marketing genius.

Mission Impossible III?

[Raiders]

Mission Impossible III?

Well, he did kill Felicity.

[Morris Schæffer]

Cloverfield and Super 8's kinda fall under what Meg is saying, but the others he was associated with? Just to name one example, Star Trek. I enjoyed it loads and yet I can't help but feel that it is probably one of the few recent movies in existence that feel both exciting and fresh and at the same time incredibly stale in terms of ideas, narrative and storytelling ingenuity.

[number8]

I wasn't sure what we're talking about with "idea," because I don't think MI3, Star Trek, LOST and Fringe were exactly his ideas. You can credit him on Cloverfield, Felicity, Alias and that new Undercovers show.

[Skitch]

Isn't all his stuff derivative of something or other?

Isn't everything?

I think JJ is one of the more interesting and visually creative directors working today.

[Raiders]

The trailer does confirm Abrams is directing and Spielberg is producing. It appears Abrams also wrote the screenplay.

[eternity]

Abrams is the "new" Soderbergh. Awesome ideas and goes against the grain to an extent, but good god does he underwhelm me.

(Except Cloverfield. But he didn't really do that one.)

[eternity]

And now it makes sense why Paramount didn't want to buy Oren Peli's Area 51 when they had first dibs on it.

[KK2.0]

i'll pay attention to whatever he attaches his name to, as a producer, director or writer, he has an eye for cool geek projects.

[KK2.0]

trailer in good quality http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPcta5V5dA0

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/paramount/super8/

observations done by some guy on the net, sorry if fake/innacurate:

- In Spielberg's Close Encounters there's a report claiming about a train wreck near a place where, in fact, an UFO has landed.

- Spielberg used to make Super 8 movies where he simulated train accidents with toys.

- In E.T. when the agents invade Elliot's home, a toy train starts moving.


looks like way too much Spielberg love going on, although i can see JJ adding all those references and easter eggs, he loves that.

[Mal]

Abrams is the "new" Soderbergh. Awesome ideas and goes against the grain to an extent, but good god does he underwhelm me.
He's more Shyamalan for me.

[eternity]

He's more Shyamalan for me.
Abrams hasn't gone full retard yet.

[Mal]

Abrams hasn't gone full retard yet.

He went full retard with MI:III. Straight out of the gate.

[Dukefrukem]

Viral begins...

http://www.rocketpoppeteers.com/

[Dukefrukem]

They're still casting this? (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/46586) I thought it was already filming.


Elle Fanning ("The Lost Room," “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”) and Kyle Chandler (“Friday Night Lights,” “The Day The Earth Stood Still”)

[Irish]

Wait. Wasn't Super 8 that shitty DePalma movie with Nic Cage?

[Ezee E]

Wait. Wasn't Super 8 that shitty DePalma movie with Nic Cage?
8MM by Schumacher.

[number8]

One side of perfs makes the difference between perversity and escapism.

[Irish]

8MM by Schumacher.

Ahahahah. Thank you. =D

[Dukefrukem]

Footage from the set

YqfIaa7ct3s

[Dukefrukem]

Rumors have it this is the monster/alien in this movie. Rumors also say it's the alien in Cloverfield 2, Steven Sommers' When Worlds Collide or Abrams' Star Trek 2.... so who knows.


http://www.aullidos.com/imagenes/varios/super-8-arte.jpg

[Chac Mool]

Rumors have it this is the monster/alien in this movie. Rumors also say it's the alien in Cloverfield 2, Steven Sommers' When Worlds Collide or Abrams' Star Trek 2.... so who knows.


http://www.aullidos.com/imagenes/varios/super-8-arte.jpg


I think I've seen this picture before -- wasn't it one of the concepts that was being debated by rabid fans trying to figure out what the Cloverfield monster looked like?

[Watashi]

j1CzuaFQ87M

First footage. Looks like Amblin: The Movie.

This should be something special.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Yeah, after watching the preview on my TV, I'm definitely intrigued. If Abrams has one talent it's in generating interest from his quick previews.

[TGM]

I'm about as interested as the first teaser made me. That is, not at all just yet.

[Dukefrukem]

The second spot didn't do much for my excitement, but still left me interested.

[megladon8]

It almost reminds me of Poltergeist in that it seems much more like a Steven Spielberg movie than a J.J. Abrams movie (or Tobe Hooper).

[Henry Gale]

Damn, Coach Taylor looks pretty rattled about whatever's attacking him and his town.

I think I'm looking forward to this more than almost any other big release this summer, so even just having this 30-second spot duiring the game tonight made me pretty happy, especially when it came to the end and I realized its release date isn't only a few months away.

[Ivan Drago]

Looks amazing. Can't wait!

[Kiusagi]

The people I was watching the Super Bowl with thought this was a remake of E.T. at first.

Anyway, looks quite good, though I was expecting some sort of sci-fi thriller.

Here's some quotes from Abrams about it:
http://www.slashfilm.com/jj-abrams-super-8-super-bowl-commercial-details-revealed/

[MadMan]

It looks decent. My interest is indeed increased by that trailer-at the very least it will be an entertaining special effects driven blockbuster, and Spielberg is usually good at those.

[Morris Schæffer]

Definitely intrigued! But who knows, it can also be a run-of-the-mill rampaging monster movie.

[number8]

Yeah, when the spot started I actually forgot that this is directed by Abrams, not Spielberg, until his name came up.

[Ezee E]

Definitely intrigued! But who knows, it can also be a run-of-the-mill rampaging monster movie.
Definitely looks more then run-of-the-mill.

[Morris Schæffer]

Definitely looks more then run-of-the-mill.

Definitely :D

[Ezee E]

I say that because some of the sweeping shots are so fluid, and the action actually looks more then the standard close-up montage. This trailer of all the other ones piqued interest more then anything else. Even at work, a lot of people were asking about the Super 8, what does it mean...

And J.J. Abrams seems to be moving to the level of well-known directors, because a few people said, "I'll see anything he does after Lost."

[DavidSeven]

That CG'ed train crash still looks terrible.

[KK2.0]

yes, It looks like JJ is making a Spielberg tribute here.

[Morris Schæffer]

That CG'ed train crash still looks terrible.

Perhaps the carriages are a bit too airborne, but it looks like it's packing quite a punch.

[megladon8]

Here's an article with J.J. Abrams discussing the plot of the film. (http://movies.ign.com/articles/114/1148139p1.html)

First thought?

Jesus, IGN, you sink to a new low every day. Maybe for the average blogger the difference between 'whose' and 'who's' is a tolerable mistake, but you're supposed to be a professional publication.


Second thought?

Wow, sounds like a Steven Spielberg movie all right.

[Dukefrukem]

set in Ohio in 1979 and introduces a troupe of six youngsters who are using a Super 8 camera to make their own zombie movie.

"One fateful night, their project takes them to a lonely stretch of rural railroad tracks and, as the camera rolls, calamity strikes — a truck collides with an oncoming locomotive and a hellacious derailment fills the night with screaming metal and raining fire. Then something emerges from the wreckage, something decidedly inhuman.

In my head I have Monster Squad meets the Goonies meets Stand By Me.

[MadMan]

In my head I have Monster Squad meets the Goonies meets Stand By Me.I like all of those movies, even though none of them are great.

[Dukefrukem]

I like all of those movies, even though none of them are great.

http://i.imgur.com/2uvaU.jpg

[MadMan]

You only gave me rep so I wouldn't put you on my ignore list, didn't you?

















Damn I can be bought off that easy.

[Ivan Drago]

Stop Duke. Just....stop.

[Dukefrukem]

You stop.

*makes an Ivan Lost/Inception pics*

[MadMan]

Hey folks I could neg rep him into stopping. But I can't. Probably for the best that we got rid of that feature anyways.

[Watashi]

Full trailer:

m_GA2tiG1TU

This looks really fucking good.

[Morris Schæffer]

Yes, it does look really rather good. Still wondering whether the script will have some great surprises up its sleeve, but even as a monster movie it does look like great entertainment.

[[ETM]]

I really dig the music. Evokes an old school feeling of spectacle.

[D_Davis]

I'm totally down with this. Reminds me a lot of an old Clifford D. Simak story; he was like the Norman Rockwell of Golden Age SF authors. Love it.

[Eleven]

Spielberg/Joe Dante vibes. Nice chick in jeans @ about 1:43.

[Qrazy]

;331339']I really dig the music. Evokes an old school feeling of spectacle.

Yeah the whole trailer but especially the music conjures up memories of early Spielberg sci fi.

[megladon8]

Spielberg/Joe Dante vibes. Nice chick in jeans @ about 1:43.


Yeah I laughed at that.

Such a random shot to include.


"OK we're at 2:29 for time, we need one more second of footage to make this trailer complete. Hey didn't we have some hottie strutting around the set one day? Yeah! Ass shot of her, annnnnnd...we're done!"

[Sycophant]

I'm interested.

It's curious that it seems like so many filmmakers feel that to capture any sort of eighties-Spielbergian spirit of youth, optimism, family, wonder, and community, they actually have to set it in Spielberg's not-too-distant past. We seem to get most of our youth stories set in the filmmaker's youths, whereas when they were growing up, it seems like they had more contemporary stories. Long for lost innocence much?

(Please note that this is by no means a well-researched and meticulously articulated point, but just an observation I'm kinda putting together right now.)

[B-side]

Full trailer:

m_GA2tiG1TU

This looks really fucking good.

Digging it. Definitely looking forward to it.

[KK2.0]

Spielberg/Joe Dante vibes. Nice chick in jeans @ about 1:43.

yes and yes

this film is going to be a nostalgic trip for people between 30 and 40, vibes from ET, Jaws, Back to the Future, Goonies, Gremlins all around, and this is just the trailer.

[Raiders]

I'm interested.

It's curious that it seems like so many filmmakers feel that to capture any sort of eighties-Spielbergian spirit of youth, optimism, family, wonder, and community, they actually have to set it in Spielberg's not-too-distant past. We seem to get most of our youth stories set in the filmmaker's youths, whereas when they were growing up, it seems like they had more contemporary stories. Long for lost innocence much?

(Please note that this is by no means a well-researched and meticulously articulated point, but just an observation I'm kinda putting together right now.)

Well, Spielberg did take part in the story committee to come up with the film's story which Abrams translated into the screenplay. So, maybe there is a little more reason behind it in this case.

Also may be that they wanted the Super 8 to feel like something more relevant to amateur/novice filmmakers.

[Eleven]

Also may be that they wanted the Super 8 to feel like something more relevant to amateur/novice filmmakers.

That's true. It's not called 12 MEGAPIXEL.

[DavidSeven]

OK, I'm impressed.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Awesome. I'm even more excited than I was.

[Watashi]

I can't remember a film that had a majority ensemble of kids that is not a kid's film.

Mean Creek, probably.

[Sven]

I can't remember a film that had a majority ensemble of kids that is not a kid's film.

Mean Creek, probably.

Kids?

[DavidSeven]

This didn't strike me as being especially "not for kids."

Oh, and George Washington.

[elixir]

Lord of the Flies?

[Mara]

I don't want it to be a monster. I want it to be cuddly and adorable.

[Mara]

They can name him Patches!

[MadMan]

Okay, that new trailer convinced me this movie is going to be awesome. And I loved the music. The shot of the army burning the field with flame throwers really stood out to me-its a really cool part of the trailer. Part of me wants the monster to be see, but at the same time it would be far more trickier if they don't ever show it and leave things to the imagination.

[Henry Gale]

Wow... Holy shit... Well, that's about as good a trailer as I could have hoped to see.

I seriously don't think there's a movie on the big summer schedule I'm looking forward to nearly as much as this. Well... Tree of Life too, but we'll see how big of a release that's given against everything else. And ok, Harry Potter should deliver as well.

But I mean, compared to next year when I can at least say I have huge superhero movies directed by Aronofsky, Nolan and Whedon as well as the Star Trek sequel (which will probably be directed by Abrams once again) to look forward to, all we seem to have coming up for Summer 2011 to compare are dozens of sequels, spin-offs, remakes, reboots to things that I only mildly care about, all of which were just made for the successes of the previous films or their general brand recognition, all being packed into a few summer months. (With the majority of them in 3D, no less!)

So I'm starting to feel fine with having Super 8 as the thing I put the most faith in for those coming months. That trailer only sealed it.

[Sxottlan]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v79/Sxottlan/super8postersmall.jpg

Love it.

[[ETM]]

^Reminds me of Sunshine.

[Derek]

Nice. This makes up for the obnoxiousness of the early marketing strategy.

[Boner M]

Yes, this looks very good. Hard to believe it isn't a Stephen King adaptation.

[Watashi]

No one has meh'd it so far?!

Where am I? What did you do with my Match-Cut?

[Kiusagi]

I really like how the trailer didn't give away much of anything, but still made it look exciting. I can imagine it's not easy to do that. Inception was marketed similarly. Let's hope it turns out as successful as that was.

Also, sweet poster.

[MadMan]

No one has meh'd it so far?!

Where am I? What did you do with my Match-Cut?I'm still waiting for someone to come along and meh it, too, just so my anticipation for this movie doesn't go up any higher.

[Boner M]

LOOKS SHIT

[Ezee E]

Love it. Can't wait. Still my most anticipated this summer.

[TGM]

Now that I've finally seen a proper trailer for this (neither of the teasers did anything for me), I'm actually sort of interested in this.

[Spun Lepton]

Wow, this looks like the kinds of Spielberg I grew up with. Anticipation has gone up. JJ Abrams is the new Spielberg?

[Sycophant]

I haven't seen anything else in his career to convince me that Abrams is any kind of new Spielberg (other than his superproducer status). In my estimation, it'll take more than one obvious Spielberg homage (and collaboration) to earn him that distinction.

[Milky Joe]

Star Trek is a better action movie than anything Spielberg's attempted in I-don't-know-how-long.

[Scar]

Loved the early teasers, but did not care for this trailer.

Still hope its good, of course.

[Raiders]

Star Trek is a better action movie than anything Spielberg's attempted in I-don't-know-how-long.

Six years.

[Milky Joe]

Try thirty-six.

I might also accept nine.

[Sxottlan]

Star Trek is a better action movie than anything Spielberg's attempted in I-don't-know-how-long.

I'd say 13 years.

[Morris Schæffer]

Controversial thought of the day. Star Trek was solid action-wise, but it stands out so much because the previous movies were definitely vastly inferior. No?


Sure, the bigger budget was evident, but did anyone find the space action even remotely close to Wrath of Khan's exhilarating space battle? The creature attack on the ice planet was arbitrary, boring even if Star Trek creatures have rarely looked quite so convincing.

No, Spielberg is tops action-wise. Minority Report, War of the Worlds, Munich all clearly prove this. :D

[[ETM]]

The creature attack on the ice planet was arbitrary, boring even if Star Trek creatures have rarely looked quite so convincing.

The creature from the ice planet is the least convincing aspect of the film for me, at least as it stands in the film - it's probably the last form of life you'd expect to find on an ice planet, as it doesn't seem to be adapted to neither the climate, nor hunting in such conditions. It's too big for such a desolate place with scarce food resources, and nothing suggests it can hunt potential food in the water under the ice. The whole sequence could be removed from the film entirely, and it would be an improvement.

[Eleven]

;331947']The creature from the ice planet is the least convincing aspect of the film for me, at least as it stands in the film - it's probably the last form of life you'd expect to find on an ice planet, as it doesn't seem to be adapted to neither the climate, nor hunting in such conditions. It's too big for such a desolate place with scarce food resources, and nothing suggests it can hunt potential food in the water under the ice. The whole sequence could be removed from the film entirely, and it would be an improvement.

Do we expect that the thought process behind its inclusion was any deeper than "sweet special effects for the Cloverfield crowd?"

[Raiders]

I doubt you're going to get $150 million and a tentpole summer release as a modern, giant space epic and not feature a close encounter with an alien monster.

It just would have been nice if the monster was a little more reasonable.

[Rowland]

So I finally watched the trailer for this, and yeah, it looks pretty cool. Star Trek was well above par by Hollywood blockbuster standards, and what I've seen of Mission: Impossible III was pretty nifty as well, so my hopes are pretty high.

[DavidSeven]

Controversial thought of the day. Star Trek was solid action-wise, but it stands out so much because the previous movies were definitely vastly inferior. No?

I never saw any of the previous films, and I thought Abrams's film was fairly stellar in terms of craftsmanship. The set-pieces were set-pieces. They were fine. It's the stuff in between that gives me hope for this film.

[Dukefrukem]

E_9feTVWk_Y

[Dukefrukem]

New Footage that confirms an "it"

http://movies.yahoo.com/summer-movies/super-8/1810159189#first

[megladon8]

I don't understand.

Was there ever any doubt about an "it"?

I mean...it's pretty much been marketed as a monster movie since day one.

[D_Davis]

So I guess the posters of this have a little peep-hole that shows hidden stuff when you look through it.

Pretty cool.

Really looking forward to this movie.

[Bosco B Thug]

I don't understand.

Was there ever any doubt about an "it"?

I mean...it's pretty much been marketed as a monster movie since day one. There's speculation that it might just be a boring old God beam/emanation of light dealy.

[Kurosawa Fan]

There's speculation that it might just be a boring old God beam/emanation of light dealy.

That would still qualify as an "it," no?

[megladon8]

A beam of light that punched a door like it had fists?

And yes, even if it's just a beam of light, it's an "it", and serves the function of a monster.

[Dukefrukem]

I don't understand.

Was there ever any doubt about an "it"?

I mean...it's pretty much been marketed as a monster movie since day one.

We knew there was a force of some sort... but the trailer suggests a physical thing.

[megladon8]

We knew there was a force of some sort... but the trailer suggests a physical thing.


Yes, but that would still be an "it"?

Even if it was just an invisible cloud that floated around making people eat themselves, that would still be an "it".

Again - even the very first teaser showed the door being bashed open, and the way it happened seemed pretty indicative of something bashing it open.

[DavidSeven]

A movie centered around a beam of light? Abrams is really taking this Spielberg homage to the next level.

[Bosco B Thug]

A movie centered around a beam of light? Abrams is really taking this Spielberg homage to the next level.
Ha!

In truth, I only read the ethereal light speculation from one random person on the internet. It manages to be one of the more possible guesses and at the same time one of the "Nah, they wouldn't do that to us" guesses.

And yes yes, whatever it is it's an "it," but since that's such a pre-determinate, I mainly complain because I don't think Abrams and co. are doing the "it" any favors by keeping such a tight lid on it.

[Bosco B Thug]

The tight lid is what's making "fist-punching Jesus light!" seem like a worthy speculation.

[number8]

A movie centered around a beam of light? Abrams is really taking this Spielberg homage to the next level.

It's confirmed that his next movie is about a sentient dolly camera that hunts down heroes and moves in closer to them from underneath.

[Dukefrukem]

http://blastr.com/assets_c/2011/05/JapaneseSuper8051911-thumb-550x815-62813.jpg

[Kurosawa Fan]

It seems like all the pics and previews are pointing to this being a new take on the E.T. story. Weird alien being just trying to get home. That sort of thing. I hope it's a bit more complex than that.

[number8]

SUUPA AITO.

[Raiders]

Reviews seem generally mixed-to-positive, but I must admit even the somewhat negative reviews make this sound awesome.

[Dukefrukem]

Tree of Life or THIS, this weekend?

Or both?

[Ezee E]

Was this shot in 70MM? Or is the opening a day early in IMAX just a ploy?

[Dukefrukem]

best poster ever

http://blastr.com/assets_c/2011/06/Super8Poster060811-thumb-480x711-63996.jpg

[number8]

How did I know that they were going to get Drew Struzan to do the poster.

I'm renaming this movie SPIELBERG SPIELBERG: THE SPIELBERGERING PART SPIELBERG.

[Dukefrukem]

How did I know that they were going to get Drew Struzan to do the poster.

I'm renaming this movie SPIELBERG SPIELBERG: THE SPIELBERGERING PART SPIELBERG.

He should do every movie.

[Watashi]

This movie is good, not great. Abrams' direction is fine, but I wish the script was a lot stronger and more to the point. I wish Abrams wasn't so restrained into making Steven Spielberg: The Movie, because if anything, the stuff without the alien are the best parts of the movie.

[Watashi]

Also, if you didn't like the lens flare in Star Trek then well.... I don't have good news for you.

[Watashi]

Rumors have it this is the monster/alien in this movie. Rumors also say it's the alien in Cloverfield 2, Steven Sommers' When Worlds Collide or Abrams' Star Trek 2.... so who knows.


http://www.aullidos.com/imagenes/varios/super-8-arte.jpg


This is pretty much what the alien looked like. Nothing really special.

[Morris Schæffer]

Best poster ever? Not by a long shot. There's nothing inspired about anything that Struzan does. I recall those prequel posters. He knows how to create a striking poster, the colors were vibrant, but it's usually just an assortment of faces.

[Winston*]

Man, this movie sucked. What a waste of time.

[Winston*]

This movie is good, not great. Abrams' direction is fine, but I wish the script was a lot stronger and more to the point. I wish Abrams wasn't so restrained into making Steven Spielberg: The Movie, because if anything, the stuff without the alien are the best parts of the movie.

I do not understand what parts of the movie you are talking about when you say the "best parts". Everything was lame.

[Watashi]

I do not understand what parts of the movie you are talking about when you say the "best parts". Everything was lame.
How do you not understand? Scenes that focus just on the kids and not the alien are the best part. It's right there in the post!

[Russ]

How do you not understand? Scenes that focus just on the kids and not the alien are the best part. It's right there in the post!
Wow. Your humor detector AND saracasm detector both malfunctioned at the exact same time.

[Watashi]

Wow. Your humor detector AND saracasm detector both malfunctioned at the exact same time.
Russ, I was being sarcastic back to Winston. Way to ruin the fun.

[Russ]

Russ, I was being sarcastic back to Winston. Way to ruin the fun.
My bad. Guess I need to get my sarcasm detector replaced. :)

[megladon8]

So what's the alien like?

[Ezee E]

This is very good. Still has the same weaknesses that any Spielberg movie would have, but its first 90 minutes are pretty great. Two fantastic action sequences, and the stuff with the kids is something that I think a lot of Match Cut will enjoy.

The very end and the forced friendship between the father and the other girl's father... Not so much. A few bad special alien effects.

Also, a very John Williams-ish score.

[Ezee E]

So what's the alien like?
Kind of what Mara implied. I expect lots of stuffed animals.

[megladon8]

Seriously? The alien is cute and cuddly?

[Ezee E]

Seriously? The alien is cute and cuddly?
Like Pikachu. But kind of mean at times.

[Winston*]

Don't dislike the movie as much today as I did last night when I'd been drinking. But still don't get what the point of it is. Both the story with the kids and their parents, and especially the alien story seemed completely half-arsed to me.

[Winston*]

I did kind of like the anti-pot scene.

[Watashi]

Super 8 can't really decide what movie to be. Sure, it's a love-letter to all things Spielberg and has the glossy 80's feel of kids going on an adventure that we don't see of anymore. However, this letter rambles on and never clearly addresses the point of the all the love. All I could think of was how better the movies were that Abrams was paying tribute to (Jaws, Close Encounters, Jurassic Park). Abrams has fallen in a trap door in which he draws suspense by teasing and hiding what the alien looks like. In Jaws, Spielberg teased us by not showing the shark because the shark was based in reality (we all know what a shark looks like) and it allowed more time to focus on building the relationships. That kinda works here, but the constant teasing of the monster is pointless because that's not what the focus should be. Is this a killer monster movie or a coming-of-age film? You can't develop both at the same time. Either show the monster from the start so we can develop a sense of empathy for it or not show it all. I don't buy the scene where Joe confronts the monster and understands him, because seconds before it killed two people and was about to kill Alice. There's no reason why everyone would watch in awe as everything is being blown to shit and magnetized everywhere.

The kids are great and Kyle Chandler is awesome in everything he does, but I wish he was given more to do.

This film actually reminded me more of The Iron Giant than anything Spielberg. Except Bird's film, the "monster" is a completely developed character who we invest in the entire runtime.

[B-side]

This is pure homage, through and through; campiness and all. Continuing what Cloverfield started with film as a historical documentation of the extraordinary, this is truly a love letter to cinema before it's a love letter to Spielberg's familial alien/monster dramas. It's no coincidence that the monster shows up at the height of the family's emotional turmoil and when the kids' camera was rolling. The film as a whole works on a level a child would recall or conjure. Their cheap little zombie film turns into a real life monster film complete with anonymous military henchmen, cover-ups, an absent father, a love story, etc. And the monster is nothing if not a universal archetype in both form and status. I was totally geeking in a way only a cinephile can by the kids' dedication to the film and the chubby kid's knowledge and opportunistic seizing of "production values."

[Sxottlan]

This was good, but I'm not thinking great. I don't know if the criticism that it was predictable is entirely fair given it's a homage to a particular era for a particular director. However, I thought it was. I think the ad campaign gave away just enough that I was able to piece it together as to what the creature was doing. Called the heirloom bit at the end too.

At least there were fewer lens flares. :cool:

With exception of Priest and POTC, this summer has been quite good so far.

[B-side]

Oh, I adored the lens flares in this. Fantastic.

[Sxottlan]

Final shot question:

In the final shot of the film, it looked like they turned down the lights of the town instead of a fade to black as the ship flew away. Does anyone else remember? I couldn't quite tell.

[B-side]

Final shot question:

In the final shot of the film, it looked like they turned down the lights of the town instead of a fade to black as the ship flew away. Does anyone else remember? I couldn't quite tell.

Seemed like a fade.

[Sxottlan]

Seemed like a fade.

Okay.

I like that we eventually saw the entire short film. Warehouse 47 is definitely a Star Trek reference.

[TGM]

I expected it to be good, but god damn, not that good!

[Fezzik]

I really liked this. The kids, in particular, were really good. I liked that they talked like kids instead of little adults.

And hey, who knew Elle was the better actor of the Fanning sisters?

It recalls so many earlier films, and not all of them Speilberg. Yes, there were clear calls outs to Close Encounters, E.T. and Jurassic Park but it also felt, at times, like a live action Iron Giant.

Not perfect, but a really nice shot in the arm. Good show by J.J., though I do admit that he's going a little overboard with the teaser shots of his monsters and the whole "Its quiet, nothing's happening at all here--BAM! surprise monster!" scenes.

[Sxottlan]

My friend and former co-worker played the girl filing the police report about her missing sister with the hair rollers.

I had actually completely forgotten she had a little role in this until she reminded me tonight, so I might see it again for her scene. But there's a lot out now that I want to see.

[transmogrifier]

My main beefs with the film:

- why have the most interesting character (Elle Fanning's) disappear for most of the last third?
- the random distruction of the town by the army was over-the-top and a cheap ploy to add a sense of danger. Not to mention poorly staged and edited.
- going overboard with the physical danger the kids are in and having them escape with almost nothing but a scratch (except when it is convenient to narrow down the number of kids as the climax approaches). The train crash is so over-the-top that their lack of injury becomes a nagging distraction in the subconcious
- Noah Emmerich's character. A complete and utter waste of time and energy. He adds nothing.
- Doing the quiet-quieter-silent-BOO shit over and over
- Why waste time having the kids go to the evacuation center just to come back again when they don't learn anything they couldn't have learnt anywhere else AND their escape is so damn boring? (a guy in a car drives them out!)
- botching the reveal of the creature on the video. Should have happened about 30 minutes sooner, and before the audience had seen it.


The more I think about it, the shoddier the whole story seems.

[Henry Gale]

Yeah, pretty great, but not really the amazingly perfect, summer movie standard-setting final product that I and probably anyone else that loved the trailer and whatnot had inflated its potential in our imaginations to be leading up to its release.

I think at the very core of it, I kinda disagree with the idea Abrams and Spielberg had about JJ's original basic premise (Stand By Me-ish story with a Super 8 camera, boy loses mother, all the kids experience life-defining changes and growth throughout a summer) that it suddenly took an alien crashing near the movie-making kids' hometown to make it an engaging story. Even though the non-horror elements seem like they could've been done before, it's the way it's they're layed out here, with the amount of heart, conviction and raw details given about the lives these people lead, that makes it as great and effective as it is here. If anything, the strongest, most emotionally engrossing stuff in it is the string of scenes dealing explicitly with Joe and his father, and also him and Alice. The bits where Joe and his friends have serious, high-tempered arguments about the filming of their movie, geek out about their zombie make-up, and explain to one another what makes a story compelling and scary, those are ones that find the most of the movie's fun, often in the simplest ways cinematically (even if some of that feels a bit self-aware early on). The monster aspects just seem in there to push its marketability into the 3,000 theatres needed to keep a nice profile in the big June release calender, while essentially telling the same fully-realized family story at its core. It helps that those scenes captured very tensely and entertainingly, but it sometimes feels the most predictable, almost like a more polished take on Cloverfield's creature-on-the-loose drama, just with a different setting and storytelling technique.

Either way, this is still a reaction and subsequent frantic herding of thoughts about a movie I'd look at as a solid 8.5, but that I'm also irrationally disappointed wasn't closer to a perfect 10. Still, the best mainstream movie of the summer, and possibly even the year, so far.

[Watashi]

I had no idea Bruce Greenwood played the alien. That's awesome.

[Rowland]

A thoughtful conversation (http://www.thelmagazine.com/TheMeasure/archives/2011/06/10/super-8-the-kids-who-knew-too-much) about the film by two of the writers for The L Magazine.

[Henry Gale]

I had no idea Bruce Greenwood played the alien. That's awesome.

Oh wow, this is Colm Feore in Thor all over again. I wonder if every big summer movie from here on out has a great Canadian actor hidden in plain sight as a villain of sorts. I guess Victor Garber in Kung Fu Panda 2 and Michael Ironside in X-Men could count for this as well.

[Pop Trash]

Echo most of what has been said already. This is Steven Spielberg: The Movie through and through. It's also as good of a time of spot-the-reference as the Kill Bill movies but easier since all the references are from one, very mainstream director. I even noticed two shots that were nods to Raiders.

The ending did go a little schmultz-overboard (which in itself is very 'berg) and everything seemed to be wrapped up pretty fast. But between this and Star Trek, Abrams sure knows how to make a movie just move, and string scenes and set pieces together with grace, humor, and entertainment. He even had less lens flares this time, but they seemed to work in the context of this better than Trek (they often came up when the camera was pointed upwards towards the sky, as if the lens flares were UFOs themselves).

Like Trek, however, the film doesn't leave much of an after-affect that would lead it to great movie status. As entertaining and well made as it is, it doesn't leave you with that haunted feeling like say, Spielberg's own great A.I..

I'm also concerned Abrams and his Bad Robot protege Matt Reeves, don't have a whole lot of originality going on. Beyond the homages, and the ability to put together films that shouldn't work but do, what are the themes and styles of Abrams/Reeves?

[Henry Gale]

I'm also concerned Abrams and his Bad Robot protege Matt Reeves, don't have a whole lot of originality going on. Beyond the homages, and the ability to put together films that shouldn't work but do, what are the themes and styles of Abrams/Reeves?

It's hard for me to pin down either of them in those sort of terms, especially since they only have a half-dozen films between them (with two being installments in existing franchises and another being a remake), and also since a significant amount of the things I love under Abrams' name are from his work in television.

And even in just that field, if we were to just look at the broad strokes in the storytelling of Alias, Lost, Fringe, or even Felicity and Undercovers, they're all about ordinary families caught up in extraordinary circumstances with new relationships being formed in the process, characters coming of age at any age, the balance of personal and professional life, exploring the ability to make peace with the past while simutaneously taking control of one's future / destiny, and um... lots of characters named Jack thrown in for good measure. Elements of all of those have all found their way into Abrams' films so far, and though they may not be the most original ideas to mine for great dramatic storytelling, I feel like the groundwork of his stories are always injected with enough unique slices of life and believable emotion to make up for whatever lack of reinvention he may set out to accomplish with the genres he tackles. And whether or not you may think the stories and characters are efficiently told and developed, they're always the things that are front and centre as the main task at hand, and the biggest priority for the action to occur as a result of, instead of the other way around.

So for someone to have output as consistent as his, and to see it exist at such a level of success (and arguably even influence), he remains one of the more exciting people for me to look forward to new projects from. I am, however, still waiting for him to make a truly fantastic film.

[Dukefrukem]

Best original screenplay

[Dukefrukem]

I haven't read any of the comments above me.

This movie was timeless Spielberg...from Abrams. At least it felt like that to me. The first 3/4 was near perfect for me on an emotional, immerse-able and entertainment level. I loved the kids, loved the individual personalities, the tone of the movie was made apparent from the start... I was hooked.



The only REAL problem for me to accept was the damage in the train crash. I think this will be a common complaint among moviegoers, but how fast does Abrams expect me to believe the train was going? And the station gets completely demolished but leaves the camera and car completely intact? (except for the broken lens of course)

Where the movie starts to unravel is when the neighborhood was under attack. From that point on I felt like I was in an episode of Lost. Too many thoughts rumbling around in Abrams's head to put on the screen at once. Too many questions left unanswered. Why were the hostages not conscious? And a slap wakes them up? Too obvious the people freed would be food for the monster during the escape. Too obvious the monster would confront one of the kids and leave them unharmed. (unless you're gonna accept the fact that the monster can read human thoughts too and could understand why he was approached, but then that asks the question why the monster would eat a young middle school girl) And how did the magnetism pick and choose which objects to take and which to leave? If the whole store blasts out the windows, why didn't the Jeep get thrown up in the air too? And the rest of the soldiers guns?


So the end comes up a bit short, but i don't care. I was sucked in up until the scene I mentioned. I dug it.

[Dukefrukem]

This movie is good, not great. Abrams' direction is fine, but I wish the script was a lot stronger and more to the point. I wish Abrams wasn't so restrained into making Steven Spielberg: The Movie, because if anything, the stuff without the alien are the best parts of the movie.

This is it. This sums it up.

[Mysterious Dude]

I think I'm starting to figure out this Abrams guy, after seeing Cloverfield, Star Trek and Super 8 (though not have seen one whole episode of any of his television shows). They're all fun, action-packed, fast-paced, and there's nothing particularly huge that's wrong with any of them, but they all feel very slight in the end. There's certainly a place for this kind of entertainment, but I wonder if Abrams is capable of doing better.

[Dukefrukem]

I think I'm starting to figure out this Abrams guy, after seeing Cloverfield, Star Trek and Super 8 (though not have seen one whole episode of any of his television shows). They're all fun, action-packed, fast-paced, and there's nothing particularly huge that's wrong with any of them, but they all feel very slight in the end. There's certainly a place for this kind of entertainment, but I wonder if Abrams is capable of doing better.

I'd say probably not. Which is a shame considering he is has the Emmerich-like touch of build in his films, but as you said, they never end up panning out. He's a marketing genius. Gets people in the seats (for the most part) and leaves them still hungry for more. It's like he gets bored in the middle of writing it and tries to slop the 2nd half together.

[Irish]

There's certainly a place for this kind of entertainment, but I wonder if Abrams is capable of doing better.

I don't know about capable, exactly, but it seems to me that he's just not interested in anything beyond high concept entertainments.

One of the touchstones of Abrams is his command of structure. Everything he's done has been incredibly well structured from start to finish. It's also been almost entirely shallow. (I'd love it if this guy produced something by Tarantino and Burton, guys who have big imaginations and larger than life characters but who have almost been entirely weak in the structures of their movies).

There's nothing wrong with high concept, but asking about Abram's capability almost seems like wondering if JK Rowling is capable of producing an Infinite Jest.

Interesting question, maybe, but also, in a certain way, the wrong one.

[Pop Trash]

(I'd love it if this guy produced something by Tarantino and Burton, guys who have big imaginations and larger than life characters but who have almost been entirely weak in the structures of their movies).


WTF?

[transmogrifier]

Best original screenplay

Hell no. The screenplay is the worst part. It's a Frankenstein-esque mish-mash of scenes that are borrowed from a million different sources and never gel together. Any movie that spends so much time on the waste of a character that is Noah Emmerich's cannot have a good screenplay.

[Winston*]

Hell no. The screenplay is the worst part. It's a Frankenstein-esque mish-mash of scenes that are borrowed from a million different sources and never gel together.
Thank you. Finding this thread very surprising, wouldn't have expected so many people to like this movie.

[Dukefrukem]

Hell no. The screenplay is the worst part. It's a Frankenstein-esque mish-mash of scenes that are borrowed from a million different sources and never gel together. Any movie that spends so much time on the waste of a character that is Noah Emmerich's cannot have a good screenplay.

Should have put a smiliey. It was kind of a joke because I did the same thing last year after having seen Inception so early in the year.

[Ezee E]

I think the posters that won't like this movie haven't watched it yet.

[Dukefrukem]

I think the posters that won't like this movie haven't watched it yet.

That would be:

8, Babydoll, irish, soitgoes, trans would be on the list but he is already confirmed to have hated it.

[Pop Trash]

That would be:

8, Babydoll, irish, soitgoes, trans would be on the list but he is already confirmed to have hated it.

Spinal could go either way (our most unpredictable M.C.-er IMO) but I'm going to say 'yay.' Raiders will probably like it.

[Pop Trash]

Also, between this and Somewhere, Elle Fanning is kind of owning. Please don't get sucked into the bullshit Hollywood world of cocaine/crappy rom-coms Elle (e.g. the careers of Lohan/Kate Hudson).

[Ivan Drago]

I think the posters that won't like this movie haven't watched it yet.

I'm hopefully seeing this sometime today or tomorrow. I hope I'm not one of those people.

[NickGlass]

If I overlook all the ridiculous crap, is it still fun? In certain moments, sure, but its uneven toeing of the line between corny, amateurish filmmaking joy and flat narrative grinding and ghetto-ed emotional sequences simply don't blend well. I wanted a sloppy meta blockbuster, and it was trying so hard to be both, tonally, that it materialized to neither.

[NickGlass]

My main beefs with the film:

- why have the most interesting character (Elle Fanning's) disappear for most of the last third?
- the random distruction of the town by the army was over-the-top and a cheap ploy to add a sense of danger. Not to mention poorly staged and edited.
- going overboard with the physical danger the kids are in and having them escape with almost nothing but a scratch (except when it is convenient to narrow down the number of kids as the climax approaches). The train crash is so over-the-top that their lack of injury becomes a nagging distraction in the subconcious
- Noah Emmerich's character. A complete and utter waste of time and energy. He adds nothing.
- Doing the quiet-quieter-silent-BOO shit over and over
- Why waste time having the kids go to the evacuation center just to come back again when they don't learn anything they couldn't have learnt anywhere else AND their escape is so damn boring? (a guy in a car drives them out!)
- botching the reveal of the creature on the video. Should have happened about 30 minutes sooner, and before the audience had seen it.


The more I think about it, the shoddier the whole story seems.

I agree with all of this. "Shoddy" is the perfect term for the film.

[Irish]

JJ Abrams was on the Daily Show last night. Interview here:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-14-2011/j-j--abrams

[Kurosawa Fan]

JJ Abrams was on the Daily Show last night. Interview here:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-14-2011/j-j--abrams

He's even starting to look like Spielberg.

[Dukefrukem]

HE was also on Howard Stern yesterday.

[origami_mustache]

This was so awful. I'm just disappointed I let the trailer fool me into seeing it.

[Dukefrukem]

Lower grade than the Hangover 2? :rolleyes:

[Pop Trash]

Lower grade than the Hangover 2? :rolleyes:

And The Green Hornet. You're fired.

[balmakboor]

Put me in the "liked it" camp. I thought Elle Fanning was terrific. I loved the scene where she blows everyone away with her acting. It reminded me of Mulholland Drive. Her zombie and home movie watching scenes were just as good.

When this movie was about the kids and little moments like those, I loved it. When it was all loud explosions and monster movie stuff, I kinda liked it. It basically felt to me like a Michael Bay movie directed by Cameron Crowe of Almost Famous. An odd and uneasy mix.

Perfect way to use the credits at the end. I wish audiences weren't so lame though. 2/3 of the audience were out of their seats and halfway to the exits as they stood and watched the credits.

[Rowland]

Hah, almost my entire audience had already raced out the doors by the time the credits sequence began, so that there were literally maybe ten of us watching it in what had been a pretty packed room.

[transmogrifier]

Yep, I was one of the ones who was gone the second the credits started. Don't feel bad about it either.

[Watashi]

Yep, I was one of the ones who was gone the second the credits started. Don't feel bad about it either.
You should pat yourself on the back for being special.

[Dukefrukem]

So what did I miss?

[origami_mustache]

And The Green Hornet. You're fired.

The Green Hornet wasn't half as bad as everyone is making it out to be just as Super 8 wasn't half as good as some people seem to think. :P

[transmogrifier]

You should pat yourself on the back for being special.

Ok.

[Ivan Drago]

The one moment I thought to be completely hokey was the scene where Joe and Alice sit in Joe's room with a film projector between them and the film that plays is, conveniently, footage of Joe as a baby with his mother. Other than that, the movie was a great fusion of Abrams and Spielberg's filmmaking styles and storytelling techniques.

[Mysterious Dude]

One thing that annoyed me about this movie: there's one kid who likes firecrackers, and that is literally the extent of his personality. When he dies, there will be nothing to say at his funeral except for how much he liked firecrackers.

[transmogrifier]

One thing that annoyed me about this movie: there's one kid who likes firecrackers, and that is literally the extent of his personality. When he dies, there will be nothing to say at his funeral except for how much he liked firecrackers.

But wasn't it convenient how his knowledge and access to firecrackers was an important factor in the climax? That came as a surprise.

[Dukefrukem]

But wasn't it convenient how his knowledge and access to firecrackers was an important factor in the climax? That came as a surprise.

:rolleyes: There were a lot of things Abrams did wrong with Super 8, but I still this was a stepping stone for him. He'll be able to reflect back on the misuse of characters and planted subject matter for future films.

The biggest being the reveal of the monster way too late. If you're gonna name a movie after the most important subject in the film, why not focus more around that subject? Oh because it takes a week for the film to finally develop. :lol: Let's see, what can we do for a week while the kids are waiting for the film to develop?

[Pop Trash]

One thing that annoyed me about this movie: there's one kid who likes firecrackers, and that is literally the extent of his personality. When he dies, there will be nothing to say at his funeral except for how much he liked firecrackers.

I'm pretty sure that kid was based a little on Tanner from The Bad News Bears (at least in his looks) and the blonde wild child from Over the Edge.

[balmakboor]

I'm pretty sure that kid was based a little on Tanner from The Bad News Bears (at least in his looks) and the blonde wild child from Over the Edge.

Exactly the same two kids I had in mind, especially the one from Over the Edge.

[balmakboor]

I'm predicting this won't lose much audience during the second and third weeks. It may even gain. My 15-year-old daughter and her friends had not heard of it. She enjoyed it so much that she's dragging all of them to it on Saturday.

She is in a group of kids who spend weekends making movies for youtube.

[Pop Trash]

Exactly the same two kids I had in mind, especially the one from Over the Edge.

Right. And I think the blonde kid in OtR also carried around an arsenal of firecrackers.

I had friends in the 80s with that same type of personality.

[Pop Trash]

I'm predicting this won't lose much audience during the second and third weeks. It may even gain. My 15-year-old daughter and her friends had not heard of it. She enjoyed it so much that she's dragging all of them to it on Saturday.


It'll be interesting to see the B.O. results this weekend. The only other tentpole release is The Green Lantern, which is getting bad buzz. Of course there is the Jim Carrey penguin movie. And people love their penguins.

[SirNewt]

Call me a sucker but I really bought the love story. Affection really grows out of hardshiip. Especially when those involved are lonely messed up people.

The father-son relationship on the other hand had no convincing resolution and no bearing on the story whatsoever. The former because, hey they're both safe now, they can go back to hating each other next week. The later because with a little tweaking you could tell the exact same story with the two getting along but still struggling with the loss of the mother. 99% of the movie was completely incidental to them hating each other.

[transmogrifier]

Yeah, the balance was all wrong. The character that most needed to "learn" something was the father; the son was pretty normal and balanced right from the start. Yet we are stuck with the kid as the main story driver. He's not even allowed to develop his "relationship" with the girl. He has a crush on her right from the start, and she figures out she likes him, and that's about that.

[balmakboor]

Yeah, this movie had its fair share of story problems. I'm very thankful for it (and this thread) giving me reason to rewatch Over the Edge and Bad News Bears. Now those are two films that are fucking near perfect. I've seen them ten times each easily and they never grow old.

[Pop Trash]

I bought the love story, but a lot of it had to do with the kid's performances. Good performances can drive suspension of disbelief a long way.

[balmakboor]

I bought the love story, but a lot of it had to do with the kid's performances. Good performances can drive suspension of disbelief a long way.

I bought pretty much everything, but, as you say, the performances put me in the mood to be forgiving.

[Rowland]

There are undoubtedly narrative contrivances, but I don't find lingering over them half as interesting as how confidently the film is crafted and how perfectly it captures that joie de vivre of insouciant youth at that very particular transitional period between childhood and adolescence. In a season of endless comic adaptations and sequels, a blockbuster that looks to the past for inspiration isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially when it wields this reverence as an inadvertent means of emboldening the notion of cinema as a conduit for emotional catharsis and a communal form of artistic self-discovery.

[SirNewt]

There are undoubtedly narrative contrivances, but I don't find lingering over them half as interesting as how confidently the film is crafted and how perfectly it captures that joie de vivre of insouciant youth at that very particular transitional period between childhood and adolescence. In a season of endless comic adaptations and sequels, a blockbuster that looks to the past for inspiration isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially when it wields this reverence as an inadvertent means of emboldening the notion of cinema as a conduit for emotional catharsis and a communal form of artistic self-discovery.

Personally I have no problem with the amount of contrivance. After all, if you can't tolerate a healthy amount of contrivance how are you ever going to appreciate a Dickens novel?

My problem is that it seemed like there was this awesome coming of age in a small town movie that literally got cut off half way through and mashed up against the later half of a creature flick. I know this is a common cliche among film critics but Super 8 really does seem to suffer from an identity crisis to me.

On the other hand I completely I agree with you. The first thing I said upon leaving the theater to my buddy was, "whatever I say about this movie in the future, I'm really glad there's a summer blockbuster this year that isn't an adaptation of a comic or 1980s toy."

I hope the movie is a great success because it might help clear Hollywood's summer pallet a bit.

[Kurosawa Fan]

My son is treating me to this tomorrow for Father's Day. I'm pretty sure he's more excited than I am, but I'm looking forward to it.

[Russ]

My son is treating me to this tomorrow for Father's Day..
That's pretty awesome.

[Ezee E]

My son is treating me to this tomorrow for Father's Day. I'm pretty sure he's more excited than I am, but I'm looking forward to it.
Could've been Popper's Penguins.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Could've been Popper's Penguins.

*shudders*

I've never been more proud than when he told me that looked stupid. I'm hoping he's getting to the age where he starts to realize not every movie is worth seeing.

[Kurosawa Fan]

That's pretty awesome.

I should mention that he doesn't have any money saved up, so basically him treating me to the movie consisted of him asking if I'd like to go see this for Father's Day. It's the thought that counts, though. I was pretty excited that he took the initiative.

[Scar]

I should mention that he doesn't have any money saved up, so basically him treating me to the movie consisted of him asking if I'd like to go see this for Father's Day. It's the thought that counts, though. I was pretty excited that he took the initiative.

This reminds me of my younger brother growing up. For Christmas or Mother's Day, he'd go shopping with my Dad. He'd get my mom a nice ring or a clock on the mantel. It always cost him five dollars....

[megladon8]

That's awesome, KF.

I hope you two have a great time, regardless of the quality of the movie.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Abrams traipses through the iconography of Spielberg (kids on bikes, spaceships at night, suburban upheaval) with the elements intact, if not always the heart. Part of the problem is that Abrams is more about wow-moments and mystery for its own sake (what does the monster look like? what does the box do? what's the connection between these two fathers?) than he is in communicating emotional development. Another part of the problem is that Abrams lacks gentility; his villains lack the dimension of Spielberg authoritarians (Keys from E. T., Vaughn from Jaws), and his alien murders and eats countless people while batting puppy-dog eyes at the hero. Still, the film works, in large part to the naturalism and success with the children's performances. These kids are eager, smart, and good-hearted, and they drive much of the action. Immediately after watching the film, two parts stay with me. Firstly, when we finally see the Super 8 project, in all its endearing glory. Secondly, in a perfect moment of Bradbury-ish nostalgia, a child waves goodbye to his friend, gets on his bike, crosses the street, and parks, because of course, by then, he's home.

B

[Chac Mool]

I enjoyed this -- a lot. It's a great little throwback to a not-so-long-ago when movies looked the same but felt different: a little more heartfelt without being forced, a little more gentle without being soft, and just as exciting without being gruesome. It's far from a perfect film (like most Abrams movies, it feels a little slight and undeveloped, more like a lengthy TV production than a feature) but it's hard not to like it.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I liked this a lot. The kids totally won me over. They were fantastic. Sure the movie has problems. The father-son denouement felt really cheap and unearned, more depth should have been mined from the mother-son relationship and the scar that left behind, etc. In fact, other than that first young romance (which is captured beautifully), the emotional core of the film is neglected in favor of adventure and thrills. This was okay with me, because the thrills worked well, and it led to the strongest focus of the film. Where the film completely succeeds is in capturing the invincibility of youth. There's a certain naiveté that is imperative for kids, and it's the ability to disbelieve their own mortality. Everything becomes an adventure, even in the face of great danger. Abrams nailed this feeling.

I'm holding out hope that at some point, Abrams will craft something that works on every level, but until then, this will do me just fine as pure entertainment.

[eternity]

I liked this a lot. The kids totally won me over. They were fantastic. Sure the movie has problems. The father-son denouement felt really cheap and unearned, more depth should have been mined from the mother-son relationship and the scar that left behind, etc. In fact, other than that first young romance (which is captured beautifully), the emotional core of the film is neglected in favor of adventure and thrills. This was okay with me, because the thrills worked well, and it led to the strongest focus of the film. Where the film completely succeeds is in capturing the invincibility of youth. There's a certain naiveté that is imperative for kids, and it's the ability to disbelieve their own mortality. Everything becomes an adventure, even in the face of great danger. Abrams nailed this feeling.

I'm holding out hope that at some point, Abrams will craft something that works on every level, but until then, this will do me just fine as pure entertainment.
Hah.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Hah.

Welcome to Pun City. I'm the unintentional Mayor.

[Spinal]

Soooo good. I thought this was completely successful as an action film and a love story. The replication of an early 80s family thriller was uncanny. I felt like I was watching a lost film from 25 years ago. Only the improved special effects and a few coy jokes give it away. The art direction, the costuming, the direction ... all stellar. And such poignancy in the ending. Not a new idea, of course, but by God, what a beautiful image. Excellent performances from Joel Courtney and Elle Fanning. Loved it.

[Spinal]

I wanted a sloppy meta blockbuster, and it was trying so hard to be both, tonally, that it materialized to neither.

Oh god, I was so glad this wasn't meta. Sincere > meta.

[Raiders]

It kills me I have had to wait so long to see this. Not happening until Saturday.

[MadMan]

I'm still digesting my thoughts, but one thing that sticks out at me is how this movie properly engages its audience. It trusts that we will be able to really become interested in the material, and that JJ and Spielberg would do something truly spectacular and meaningful, which is what this movie turned out to be. But I also love Super 8 because, unlike Transformers, which Spielberg is also producing, its doesn't feel the need to be bomblastic and loud, afraid that if something doesn't happen every five minutes the audience will lose interest and not watch.

Also those kid actors were excellent.

[EyesWideOpen]

I loved the film. My only major complaint is the train crash. It went on for far too long and was too overblown.

[Dukefrukem]

I loved the film. My only major complaint is the train crash. It went on for far too long and was too overblown.

Yes (http://match-cut.org/showthread.php?p=352486#post35 2486). Was it going 300 mph??

[soitgoes...]

"I got you."

:rolleyes:

[soitgoes...]

That would be:

8, Babydoll, irish, soitgoes, trans would be on the list but he is already confirmed to have hated it.Weird that I'd be included in this list. I mean sure, I'm not hot on the film, but I do like quite a few blockbuster films, and I'm a pretty big fan of Spielberg's films (who everyone says Abrams modeled this film on). I guess you ended up having more insight into me than I have, so there's that.

[Kurosawa Fan]

"I got you."

:rolleyes:

Yeah, dreadful moment. Totally unearned. Also totally excusable due to the film's other successes.

[Rowland]

Hmm, I don't remember the context of "I got you." On the other hand, I thought that Fanning's father crying out "I'm sorry!" the moment before he crashes his car was an affecting scene.

[Spinal]

I'm unclear as to what's wrong with that line. Seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to be said at that moment.

[D_Davis]

I'm unclear as to what's wrong with that line. Seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to be said at that moment.

Your fanboy reaction is obviously clouding your judgment.

[Spinal]

Your fanboy reaction is obviously clouding your judgment.

That's me. I sleep in J.J. Abrams pajamas.

[D_Davis]

That's me. I sleep in J.J. Abrams pajamas.

Yeah. You're a total super fan. I remember when you were all "Lost this.." "Lost that..."

Man, it was got sooooo annoying.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I'm unclear as to what's wrong with that line. Seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to be said at that moment.

I don't think it's the line itself, but the way the scene is presented.

It seemed to imply that some sort of emotion bridge had been gapped by the father and son, when in reality, the film offered no evidence of this. Joe had been neglected emotionally by his father, and that never changed. Even when his father escapes military capture, the first thing he does upon making it to the evacuation point was talk about what the military was doing, rather than look for or ask about his son. His deputy has to interrupt him and tell him what happened to Joe before he shows concern. Joe manages the entire situation just fine on his own, and so when his father arrives after everything is drawing to a close and behaves as though Joe needed the security of his father, it feels cheap and unearned. His father has done nothing to deserve that moment of catharsis, and the poignancy of that scene comes from Joe and Alice holding hands.

That was my take on it, anyway. Still, really liked the movie, and it has settled really well. My son and I were quoting moments from the kids while eating lunch this afternoon.

[soitgoes...]

I don't think it's the line itself, but the way the scene is presented.

It seemed to imply that some sort of emotion bridge had been gapped by the father and son, when in reality, the film offered no evidence of this. Joe had been neglected emotionally by his father, and that never changed. Even when his father escapes military capture, the first thing he does upon making it to the evacuation point was talk about what the military was doing, rather than look for or ask about his son. His deputy has to interrupt him and tell him what happened to Joe before he shows concern. Joe manages the entire situation just fine on his own, and so when his father arrives after everything is drawing to a close and behaves as though Joe needed the security of his father, it feels cheap and unearned. His father has done nothing to deserve that moment of catharsis, and the poignancy of that scene comes from Joe and Alice holding hands.

That was my take on it, anyway. Still, really liked the movie, and it has settled really well. My son and I were quoting moments from the kids while eating lunch this afternoon.
Your take is pretty much dead on. Also the father's forgiveness of Alice's dad also was unearned. That whole bit just seemed like Abrams was grasping for some real sentimentality, but it all rang so false with me that it really killed what was the emotional crescendo of the film.

[Spinal]

Both those moments worked for me. I thought they were honest. Ah well.

[megladon8]

Fanboy.

[Spinal]

And doesn't the fact that the son faced up to greater horrors than the father could imagine just make his attempt to re-establish his parental responsibility all the more compelling? It does for me.

[Spinal]

Fanboy.

Excuse me, that's hipster emo fanboy.

[soitgoes...]

And doesn't the fact that the son faced up to greater horrors than the father could imagine just make his attempt to re-establish his parental responsibility all the more compelling? It does for me.No it feels misplaced, as if Abrams knew he needed to ramp up the emotional state of the film after Joe and the aliens meeting (which was handled far better), and he needed to tie up the father/son storyline because he was running out of time to do it. The last conversation Joe and his father had was the dad telling Joe that under no circumstance must Joe see Alice. Period. What changed between them from that moment to their hug? A bunch of alien shit, but most of that the dad was ignorant of. The dad was busy becoming BFF's with his most hated enemy, again with zero reasoning as to why.

[Spinal]

No it feels misplaced, as if Abrams knew he needed to ramp up the emotional state of the film after Joe and the aliens meeting (which was handled far better), and he needed to tie up the father/son storyline because he was running out of time to do it. The last conversation Joe and his father had was the dad telling Joe that under no circumstance must Joe see Alice. Period. What changed between them from that moment to their hug? A bunch of alien shit, but most of that the dad was ignorant of. The dad was busy becoming BFF's with his most hated enemy, again with zero reasoning as to why.


Well, boy, I respectfully disagree.

It's pretty obvious why the two dads unite. Enemies are united by a threat that is greater than the both of them. Through an encounter with a dangerous alien creature, they find that their past bickering seems small and petty. They find that they are capable of forgiveness. I don't think they are becoming best friends. I think that they are uncomfortable allies, willing to set aside their differences out of love for their children.

The deputy dad doesn't know all that his son has done. What he does know is that his son has acted with courage and valor to save his friend. He recognizes that the love and moral strength that his son must possess is enormous. He knows that his son has risen to the occasion because he himself has been absent as a father emotionally. His words to his son come too late, but they are everything that he wants to be true.

It's really quite an extraordinary ending. I'm surprised that some of you felt let down.

[Rowland]

That was my take on it, anyway. Still, really liked the movie, and it has settled really well. My son and I were quoting moments from the kids while eating lunch this afternoon.Oh my god, drugs are SO bad!

[Watashi]

I could get back into disco.

[Pop Trash]

It's really quite an extraordinary ending. I'm surprised that some of you felt let down.

I felt like some of the sentimentality (earned or unearned depending on your vantage point) was simply more Spielberg homage, so it worked for me.

[Spinal]

It's weird, but the Spielberg film this reminded me of most was War of the Worlds. Which is not one from the Spielberg 'golden age' obviously. Maybe it was the Fanning presence.

[Pop Trash]

It's weird, but the Spielberg film this reminded me of most was War of the Worlds. Which is not one from the Spielberg 'golden age' obviously. Maybe it was the Fanning presence.

Oh man...but Elle's performance here is SO much better than Dakota's was in WotW. Screeeeeeech!!! I blame Spielberg more for that than Dakota though.

[Spinal]

Oh man...but Elle's performance here is SO much better than Dakota's was in WotW. Screeeeeeech!!! I blame Spielberg more for that than Dakota though.

I don't think Dakota was bad, but I agree that Elle was much better. Abrams certainly gets better performances from his kid actors than Spielberg generally did. Far less cloying.

[MadMan]

I didn't have any problems with the last act and ending at all. I think the only reason I didn't give it a 100 or **** was because in the end, I just didn't feel it was worthy of such a high rating. Maybe I'd have to rewatch the movie again, but I didn't think any elements were particularly bad or felt forced. When I think about it though, I kind of wonder why I love so many of Spielberg's movies when I don't have any father issues, something that is obviously stated in most of his work, even this one, which he merely produced.

[soitgoes...]

I think the only reason I didn't give it a 100 or **** was because in the end, I just didn't feel it was worthy of such a high rating.
Totally. :lol:

[transmogrifier]

I didn't have any problems with the last act and ending at all. I think the only reason I didn't give it a 100 or **** was because in the end, I just didn't feel it was worthy of such a high rating.

I'm not sure there is a better example than this to demonstrate the adjective "Madmanesque"