It is currently December 6th 2019 2:08 pm




 
Post Posted: March 11th 2011 4:05 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 12th 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 2556
Location: Toronto, Canada
[align=center]www.super8-movie.com

TRAILERS[/align]
[spoil]
[flash width=640 height=385]http://www.youtube.com/v/CqvZMhRB5cE?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0&hd=1[/flash]
[/spoil]
[spoil]
[flash width=640 height=385]http://www.youtube.com/v/j1CzuaFQ87M&fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0&hd=1[/flash]
[/spoil]
[spoil]
[flash width=640 height=385]http://www.youtube.com/v/kRx8KXBzGME&fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0&hd=1[/flash]
[/spoil]

JJ Abrams is the ultimate student and admirer of Spielberg and Lucas plus he hasn't made a movie I haven't thought was great. From the looks of it, Super 8 will be the closest we'll get to classic Spielberg.

It's Close Encounters meets ET with a sprinkle of War of the Worlds. Sign me up.


Post Posted: March 11th 2011 4:35 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 28th 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 51
The musical cues in the trailers certainly give it that Spielbergy "feel". I really hope that Abrams can stay on target, as like you I have really enjoyed just about everything that he has had his cinematic hand in thus far. But as a moviegoer who has experienced letdowns of M. Night Shyamalan proportions, I think I will approach this with caution.


Btw I really did not enjoy War of the Worlds. So I'm hoping the reputed alien angle takes more of Close Encounters type turn.


Post Posted: March 11th 2011 8:30 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 12th 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 2556
Location: Toronto, Canada
I agree about the Close Encounters bit. I hope we don't see the creature/alien until the final scenes.

I thought War of the Worlds had some real high moments - the initial alien attack being the most notable - but it seemed to lose focus when Tom Cruise thought he lost his son. The final act was genuinely disappointing. This was also around the time Tom Cruise was going crazy with Katie Holmes and Scientology so unfortunately that's one of my lingering memories of War of the Worlds.


Post Posted: March 23rd 2011 1:50 pm
 
User avatar

Title: darthpsychotic@gmail.com
Join: July 3rd 1971 6:59 pm
Posts: 4247
For the record:
    Image

Purported Concept Art


Post Posted: March 23rd 2011 5:59 pm
 
User avatar

Join: April 20th 2004 11:57 pm
Posts: 519
Location: Southern California
You say "Close Encounters" meets "E.T.," I say "The Goonies" meets "Cloverfield," either way "Super 8" probably won't be anything we haven't seen already. Not saying this flick doesn't look entertaining or that I'm not looking forward to it though.


Post Posted: May 19th 2011 7:02 pm
 
User avatar

Title: darthpsychotic@gmail.com
Join: July 3rd 1971 6:59 pm
Posts: 4247
Trailer 4 & "Film" Short:

[flash width=640 height=385]http://www.youtube.com/v/ct2z7ZBwYzg?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0&hd=1[/flash]

[flash width=640 height=385]http://www.youtube.com/v/W659aiwO3gM?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0&hd=1[/flash]


Post Posted: June 10th 2011 2:30 am
 
User avatar

Join: April 26th 2005 11:20 am
Posts: 1194
Caught this at a midnight showing a while ago.

I enjoyed it, mostly. Has a really satisfying sense of adventure and is a loving homage to early Spielberg films.

I didn't really like the creature design, though. Too amorphous.


Post Posted: June 11th 2011 1:07 am
 
User avatar

Join: October 12th 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 2556
Location: Toronto, Canada
This was my most anticipated movie this summer for a couple of reasons: First off, I'm a Spielberg die-hard. He's the creator of cinematic comfort food as far as I'm concerned. His films define my childhood. Second, I've been impressed with the development of J.J. Abrams as a filmmaker. I was never into Lost, but I suppose he did something right to get America more concerned with what happens next on a secluded island than their economic future. Then again, people watch the Kardashians.

From the trailers, Super 8 looked like the ultimate throwback film to my childhood: you've got a sci-fi mystery set in 1970s suburbia with a child cast at the forefront of the action. The musical cues, the camera movements, the lens flare; it just LOOKED like Spielberg. Does the final product measure up to that promise? The answer is yes and no.

J.J. Abrams is not Steven Spielberg. He might well develop into a prized storyteller with an impressive portfolio of original works, but at this stage of his career he lacks the fairy dust required to turn a film into movie magic. He also isn't armed with John Williams and as famed a crew as Spielberg wielded during his golden run. It makes a big difference. Super 8 is a very, very good movie but in comparing it against the likes of Jaws, E.T., and Close Encounters - which is what J.J. Abrams seems to be begging us to do from behind the director's chair - it just feels lacking. It lacks the cohesion and effortless organic storytelling of those films. It lacks a memorable set piece or line of dialogue or lasting image. Abrams tries to force some imagery for us to hold onto (like the alien "Rubik's Cubes" and the water tower) but they feel manufactured.

There's also a lot the film gets right. The cast is excellent and the dialogue is mostly terrific. The child cast in particular is probably the best child ensemble I've seen in some time. It's a blast to watch these kids interact and argue with each other and we really care about their plight, particularly in the first half. Joe Lamb and Alice Dainard could be characters from a Spielberg film and Jackson Lamb essentially has been in the form of Brody (albeit with less of a "hero" role). The tone of the setting is spot on and it really captures that suburbia feel that's so memorable from Spielberg's classics.

What didn't work for me as much? The sci-fi mystery. I want to say it felt very manufactured and disjointed from the overall story, but that's not exactly right; it just isn't so interesting. It doesn't inspire any "wow" moments. Some could argue that the mystery is not the point: this is a coming of age story about a boy getting over the loss of his mother and finding love for the first time. That's fair and I'm not saying this isn't a very good movie, cause it is, I'm just saying that what separates Super 8 from Spielberg is that Spiely gets the sci-fi element as right as the human story. I didn't yawn through the final third of Super 8, but I wasn't hanging on the edge of my seat. Jaws is about a lot more than hunting a man-eating shark, but we're always engrossed in the adventure of finding and killing the beast. Ditto for Close Encounters and E.T. Super 8 lacks this.

Another issue I have with the film can be summed up in three letters: ILM. You know when I felt most pulled out of the story? When computer generated metal was being thrown through the air and this completely ridiculous looking alien was smashing things. It's not that the visuals are bad - they're state of the art - but they're so opposite to what this film is trying to be that they can't help but distract us from the illusion. CG is not a bad thing, it just need to be used in the right context and this story needed "invisible" VFX. As for the creature, I don't know what J.J. Abrams' fascination is with amorphic alien design, but it doesn't work for this film. I think we're supposed to emotionally connect with this alien and its plight, but we can't because it looks reminiscent of the Cloverfield and Star Trek monsters. The monster CGI is just not very good either. We needed a practical alien, in addition to practical effects, for this film to work a bit better.

Very good movie. Maybe the most heart I've seen from a studio "blockbuster" in years. I just didn't have my socks blown off like I expected to. That's probably unfair because of how good the movie actually is, but if you want to be compared with the greats - as this movie does - you've got to be held to that standard.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/reviews/1178/super-8

Exactly how I feel.


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 



Jump to:  




millenniumfalcon.com©
phpBB©