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

Batutta said:
[...]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...

Frankenstein mish-mash? To be honest what I love about this film is that it's trying something different. It is a mish-mash, but done in a subtle/gentle way. This isn't Pirates of the Carribean 2, 3 or 4 where none of the stories match, and it's a huge mess. Super 8 has this paranormal mysterious event going on, while a bunch of kids are just being kids. This event starts changing everything around them, and as time goes on they get more and more drawn into the event.

Bravo to Abrams for not just doing another monster movie.
 
Jon Starr said:
Frankenstein mish-mash? To be honest what I love about this film is that it's trying something different.
Click to expand...

I admire their ambitions. I just don't think they achieved them very well. I meant Frankenstein in that they stitched disparate movie ideas together rather messily. You can still see the seams and it's clunky. I won't repeat the rest of what I've been saying as I think I made my points previously. If you enjoyed the movie I'm not offended. I'm more frustrated by what could have been great so easily.
 
It's just another kiddie movie (my 8 year old nephew loved it) with big names behind it. The script was written in 10 minutes focused exclusively for kids under 10.
I still believe in JJ Abrahms and will wait until he films a decent movie for adults, I would have crucified him if he had intended Super 8 to be for all ages...
 
MattinSTL said:
SPOILERS IN GRAY

The final movie that plays during the credits... that the kids made... has a way more complete story then the movie itself.
Click to expand...

The thing which really made me smile was the projector sound FX coming from the back speakers while it ran.
 
I think the biggest problem I had was that the creature was in no way believable as what it was supposed to be.

But, all problems aside, there really was a Spielberg movie of the era trying to get out. I did get the 10 year-old's vibe a number of times, so I enjoyed it.

But again, dammit, if you're going to have all those frickin' smears and flares, then I want matte lines and model photography.
 
David Jimerson said:
Ugh. I want to slap those fake lens artifacts right out of Abrams. Didn't he learn from his mistakes?
Click to expand...

I agree. It's even worse on second viewing. There are locked-down shots with no visible light sources, and then a flare just strikes out of nowhere halfway through the shot.
 
I haven't seen this movie since it was in theater back in June. I thought the movie itself was good. Super 8 had a decent story and the acting was pretty good considering how young those actors and actress were. I think he wanted to film to not have much light in it. JJ wanted this film to be dark and mysterious.
 
A film of two halves for me... excellent in the beginning but slowly fell apart towards the end, the last act in was particularly poor IMHO
 
What I want to know is......how did we ever capture and hold that 'creature' umpteen years ago, if we can't even slow it down now with our current weaponry???
 
David W. Richardson said:
What I want to know is......how did we ever capture and hold that 'creature' umpteen years ago, if we can't even slow it down now with our current weaponry???
Click to expand...

ur-doin-it-wrong-05.jpg
 
Got this film over the holidays and watched it for the first time since the theaters. Loved it then, and still do. The kids make it work for me. Plot holes and all that I can put aside. It's nice to watch a film that feels a bit "whimsical" for a change. Not as good as Spielberg is at it, but good none the less.

And I'll take all those lens flares you all seem to be throwing out, ha!
 
"Whimsical"? When I think of whimsical, I think of something like "Mary Poppins" or "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory". This movie was much too dark and violent for that, in my mind.

I wish the kids had behaved like normal kids in an extraordinary situation. Sloppy writing.
 
I just saw it for the first time. I liked it, but very not magical. A whole bunch of suspension of disbelief to get through, sure, but you kind of have to expect that with most any monster flick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top