Super 8 - Is it going to be 'Magical'?

Matt, I agree completely. But like you, I still enjoyed the crap out of it. :)
It was a fun action film with some heart and a little cheese on the side.
I hope to see it again at IMAX.
 
I think you either like JJ Abrams or you don't. I loved this movie and I loved Lost, same thing with both, character driven story with a bunch of Sci-fi stuff happening all around them. I think the CG age has over sensationalized movies, everyone wants robots blowing stuff up and over dramatic action scenes.

Spoilers:

Everything that happened with the alien and the why and how it was there made no difference, the movie was about the group of kids and in particular moving past the kids mother's death. They did bring everything together at the end when he realized that bad things are going to happen but you have to let go and move past it. The Psychic connection the alien had with him made the alien realize the same thing which was why everything started to work and he was able to leave. I don't understand the need to have everything expained out in detail when it has no real bearing on the one main point of the whole movie, letting go and moving on.

Everyone was pissed off at Lost for the same reasons, but in the end it didn't matter (not saying I liked the ending alt story line)

I think if ET was released today, people would be upset if we weren't told why he was on earth in the first place, they should have gone into more detail about his planet and people, did the space ship taking him home stopped at the Restaurant at the End of the Universe on the way home, did ET update his Facebook Status about what he ate?

We don't need all the details, just the ones essential to the story, and the story was about the group of kids not the alien.
 
bhal1075 said:
Everything that happened with the alien and the why and how it was there made no difference, the movie was about the group of kids and in particular moving past the kids mother's death.
Click to expand...

Then why put the alien in it at all? They are two separate plots crudely stitched together. The story of E.T. was about a boy who finds, and befriends an alien. Their two stories are intimately intertwined and without that relationship there would be no movie. Here you could almost make two separate films out of the alien and kids story. It's sloppy screenwriting. JJ's skill as a filmmaker is the only thing holding it together.
 
Batutta said:
Then why put the alien in it at all? They are two separate plots crudely stitched together. The story of E.T. was about a boy who finds, and befriends an alien. Their two stories are intimately intertwined and without that relationship there would be no movie. Here you could almost make two separate films out of the alien and kids story. It's sloppy screenwriting. JJ's skill as a filmmaker is the only thing holding it together.
Click to expand...


I'm saying the details of the alien don't matter, it's just the dramatic event going on that triggers the epiphany in the main character. So for instance, if a group of kids travels down the railroad tracks to see a dead body does it matter how the dead body got there? It's just the circumstance going on, giving them the adventure that leads to whatever epiphany they have. JJ just likes big complicated sci-fi events going on instead of something average and mundane like most stories. But it's still only the story of the kids that should be the focus. Like I said you either like him or you don't.

If Stand By Me was made today, I don't think anyone would go see it unless they added several explosions and a high speed chase to it.
 
bhal1075 said:
Like I said you either like him or you don't.

If Stand By Me was made today, I don't think anyone would go see it unless they added several explosions and a high speed chase to it.
Click to expand...

Uh, no...I don't love or hate JJ. I take each work on it's own terms, don't care who made it. I didn't care where the alien came from either. I cared that the kids story has little bearing on the aliens story. They were poorly integrated...And Stand By Me still would find an audience today. It wasn't a monster blockbuster, it was a sleeper hit that made a modest gross. Now Hollywood isn't interested in making those smaller films anymore, I'll agree, but there is an audience for them.
 
Last edited:
It's not "sloppy screenwriting" at all. This storytelling principle is the basis for most films. The characters you care about experience a larger-than-life event, we see the event through their eyes and how it affect their lives, until we reach a conclusion. If this is "sloppy" then so is Jaws. The "event" could be anything, because the event is secondary to the characters. This reminds me of similar complaints about the movie "The Mist". Great film that has nothing at all to do with The Mist or what's in it, but many can't seem to get or accept that.

Why have it all? To introduce elements of mystery, danger, suspense, and excitement to compliment our concern, care, and interest in the characters. It makes for an evocative and entertaining cinematic experience. Over-analyzation makes for the opposite. As JJ himself said, he wants you to be laughing one minute, crying the next, and afraid the next. Because those are the types of films he grew up loving and admiring, and being inspired by. And that's what he's paying homage to (brilliantly, I might add).
 
*** SPOILERS ***

Well, so I finally got to see this today.
I thought it was great, but as far as the writing goes, I think the main issue is that it doesn't become a "Goonies" type thing until act 3 when the kids actually looks at the footage and finds out there's an alien in town. By then 3/4 of the film has passed already.
That should be the act break into act 2, and everything that happens in act 1 and 2 should have been taken care of in the first 25 minutes of the film.
THAT'S the problem.

It's fascinating though how much it had in common with CLOVERFIELD. It's almost as if it takes place in the same universe, or that it could be a prequel to that film. Instead of being centered around a digital video camera (which is the modern equivalent to super 8), it's centered around some kids shooting a super 8 film. I would certainly buy it if they told me the Super 8 alien and Cloverfield came from the same planet, even if they might not be the same species.

It also reminded me a lot of MONSTERS.
 
lwright84 said:
It's not "sloppy screenwriting" at all. This storytelling principle is the basis for most films. The characters you care about experience a larger-than-life event, we see the event through their eyes and how it affect their lives, until we reach a conclusion. If this is "sloppy" then so is Jaws. The "event" could be anything, because the event is secondary to the characters. T
Click to expand...

You're confusing the premise with the execution. I don't have a problem with the premise of Super 8, it's how it's done here. In Jaws, our protagonist, Chief Brody is directly responsible for the well being of the townspeople, so when the shark starts eating people, it directly impacts him. He goes about trying to solve this problem, until he realizes he has to go out and kill the shark despite his fear of the water. In Super 8, the kids spend nearly the entire 2nd act doing nothing about the problem of the Monster rampaging through town. They are never threatened by it until the last 20 minutes. They spend most of the time trying to film their movie and make out with a girl while one of the most significant things that's ever happened on planet earth occurs off screen. It's two separate movies stitched together into a Frankenstein mish-mash of a plot. JJ may have been inspired by Spielberg's films but he is a poor student.
 
Batutta said:
You're confusing the premise with the execution. I don't have a problem with the premise of Super 8, it's how it's done here. In Jaws, our protagonist, Chief Brody is directly responsible for the well being of the townspeople, so when the shark starts eating people, it directly impacts him. He goes about trying to solve this problem, until he realizes he has to go out and kill the shark despite his fear of the water. In Super 8, the kids spend nearly the entire 2nd act doing nothing about the problem of the Monster rampaging through town. They are never threatened by it until the last 20 minutes. They spend most of the time trying to film their movie and make out with a girl while one of the most significant things that's ever happened on planet earth occurs off screen. It's two separate movies stitched together into a Frankenstein mish-mash of a plot. JJ may have been inspired by Spielberg's films but he is a poor student.
Click to expand...

Wow, when you put it that way, I may actually want to go see this now...
 
Mark Harris said:
Wow, when you put it that way, I may actually want to go see this now...
Click to expand...

Tell them I sent you...I don't know why I have to be the guy who beats up on this movie. I think I'm harder on films that had greatness in their grasp and fumble it than movies that never had a chance. JJ's got a lot of talent, but I think he tries to do too many things in his movies and eventually loses sight of core storytelling principles.
 
Batutta said:
Tell them I sent you...I don't know why I have to be the guy who beats up on this movie. I think I'm harder on films that had greatness in their grasp and fumble it than movies that never had a chance. JJ's got a lot of talent, but I think he tries to do too many things in his movies and eventually loses sight of core storytelling principles.
Click to expand...

Y'know, JJ at times seems like he's better suited for a major studio's marketing department than directing. He's all about the hook in the logline, the mysterious and intriguing trailer/poster, the alternate reality marketing game. Sometimes he manages to get a good movie across, too, but he seems more focused on getting asses in seats (Eh, who could blame him, I suppose).

E.T. didn't need to hide the alien in the initial marketing to succeed. It was obvious what that film was about in the trailer. It's this modern coy B.S. that's really starting to wear on my nerves.
 
Batutta said:
Tell them I sent you...I don't know why I have to be the guy who beats up on this movie. I think I'm harder on films that had greatness in their grasp and fumble it than movies that never had a chance. JJ's got a lot of talent, but I think he tries to do too many things in his movies and eventually loses sight of core storytelling principles.
Click to expand...

Well, I am so ****ing bored of all movies being exactly the same now that if something sounds like it's off the path, or not quite right, or off kilter, I'm more likely go see it.
 
Ian-T said:
Geez....you guys think too much. :) Suspend your reality a little.
Click to expand...

I try to most of the time...but the movies often get in the way. I generally don't sit there analyzing a film while I watch it. I have an emotional reaction, or I don't have one, and then think over what I just saw after the fact.
 
storytelling principles?

i don't even remember if mission impossible 3 had a story.

star trek, didn't really have a story, or any kind of story structure.

and we are talking about mission impossible where anything can be done by the hero, and star trek, a sci-fi with time travel.

from star trek,
he saw it in the shallowest way possible and then exaggerated the hell out of it, not really a good way to reading or understanding anything.

from what i remember
let's introduce the setting like other movies, other movies have explosions, people dying, people murdered, sacrifice, child birth, villain introduced, war, end of the world, *i don't remember the rest, i'm sure there was more*, and have all of them at the same time. - not even bollywood movies from 70s or 80s had these many things at the introduction.

and then he redid the introduction maybe two more times.

let's have that shot that i like from other films
lens flare
let's have an action sequence
lens flare
let's have people running
lens flare
lens flare
oh, wait...i forgot something. was there supposed to be a lens flare scene here.
let's have this character exaggerated
lens flare
we want origin characters, let's let's have the character opposite to what they will become. (i'm sure from this movie, he doesn't understand character development)
lens flare
action sequence
lens flare
nothing was logical or made sense till now, but we need to go deep into the sci-fi realm.
what cool stuff can we do, and how shallow can we look at them and then exaggerate the interpretation.
 
Dissapointed fell half a sleep halfway through...and then you had the credits which actually showed a movie !

If this movie is made to pay homage to the ET and Goonies ..they didnt even come close.
The anamorpflares anoyed the hell out of me.

MONEY WASTED !
 
SPOILERS!!!

Mint! Loved this movie.

- Thought the acting was great, especially the two leads did well together.
- The lighting/textures on the alien looked great, didn't look too shiny like a lot of cgi monsters.
- loved the wing of the spaceship in the b+f film collapsing into the cubes.
- would have liked the kid to have more compassion for the alien and though he was going to 'help' the alien earlier and in more of a real way. Such as maybe show him where cubes were or something.
- I'm fine with them not telling is where alien came from; prefer it in this instance.
- LENS FLARE give it a rest JJ! I'm all for natural lense flare but he does it so many times in ways that are blatant and distracting. Argh

4/5
 
Saw it. Overall, a good time at the movies:

Small spoilers ahead

Liked

1- Actors. Spot on, felt like "Goonies", new generation. Yes, some stereotypical, but had nice chemistry between them.
2-Opening sequence. Absolutely fantastic and shows why we don't need 3D to give a grand spectacle. Those 5 minutes of the train were more entertaining and spectacular then the whole of Transformers 2, for example.
3- Had definitely a family friendly feel to it, excluding the pot jokes and occasional gore, something you don't see in summer blockbuster movies very often nowadays, not since Spielberg or, er, Jumanji.
4- No 3D. Yes, I insist. Great time at the movies without the need of those glasses.
5- Ending short film. Absolutely hilarious. Makes me want to shoot something like that.

Not so Good

1- Cloverfield Monster in SD (not standard definition, but Super Deformed) form.
2- Stereotypical army guys.
3- " Jokes" didn't work for me- the junkie, the Sherif, the rescued lady, etc...
4- Plot Holes and some ridiculous developments- Lots of them, that's a fact, but after that beautiful start and the chemistry of the characters, you end up forgiving those " details". This is not a film that aims to be the thinking man's blockbuster of the summer, but just an entertaining, family, old school film. All in all, if you accept it for what it is, you end up caring for the kids stories and forget the somehow absurd plot and its development happening in the sidelines.

IMO, like I said at the beginning, a fun and entertaining time at the movies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top