"Super 8" has been done before...

POSTED BY: whozit
UPDATED: Thursday, June 16, 2011 00:43
VIEWED: 5185
PAGE 2 of 2

PREV PAGE 1 2

STORYMARK

Tuesday, June 14, 2011 4:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:

Yeah, die-hard Trekkies are very protective of their "property" but I guess we would feel somewhat the same if someone came along and messed with our BDH.

Why is it that the fans who didn't like it think they're the only die-hards. I know plenty of die hard trekkies, myself included, who enjoyed the new film. Matter of fact, it's kinda hard for it to become the most successful film of the series without ANY of the fans liking it.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

SHINYGOODGUY

Tuesday, June 14, 2011 4:21 PM

I did generally like Super 8 and went in with an open mind knowing only 3 things - Speilberg, Abrams and Elle Fanning.
BTW Elle Fanning was striking in this movie, she was solid, as was the young male lead. There was a scene early on that reminded me of a scene from Mulholland Drive. The one where Naomi Watts character goes to audition for a TV role and was absolutely riveting. Elle channeled Naomi in that brief moment. Very impressive, watch out Dakota. Actually I remember Dakota saying in an interview a few years back that she believed her sister was better than her.

At first I thought it was the obvious family backing, but now I don't know if she's right. Actually she is. At this stage of the game Elle's screen presence is growing in breadth and depth over that of her sister. She's a tall drink of water too.

SGG

"Rules!?, in a knife fight!"

SHINYGOODGUY

Tuesday, June 14, 2011 5:28 PM

I thoroughly enjoyed Gary Westfall's review of Super 8. He dissected the true nature of the film and exposed both the obvious and hidden flaws in the film

Select to view spoiler:

what I found especially silly was the monster's meal habits and his sudden change from ravenous beast compassion alien

.

I remember Roger Ebert's argument with Gene Siskel years back about how different movies are made for different reasons, some are made to invoke emotion or thought, yet others are made for mindless fun (I'm paraphrasing). My guess is that Super 8 falls under the heading "mindless fun", and, according to Ebert, that's okay there's a place in this world for such a film. But I agree with Westfahl that Super 8 is not science fiction, but rather a mash-up of different genres emphasizing the entertainment aspect. I suspect that Abrams slapped this movie together in between Fringe and his other endeavors. Not much more to say, except thanks for posting the articles, E.C.

SGG

SHINYGOODGUY

Tuesday, June 14, 2011 5:41 PM

Why is it that the fans who didn't like it think they're the only die-hards. I know plenty of die hard trekkies, myself included, who enjoyed the new film. Matter of fact, it's kinda hard for it to become the most successful film of the series without ANY of the fans liking it.

-True that. You get those that feel they "know" best and express themselves to the exclusion of others, including fans.

I would never be so presumptuous.

SGG

Tawabawho?

TWO

Tuesday, June 14, 2011 7:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
...I kind of agree with the Super 8 review and the comment regarding Star Trek, both films were "fun" with flashes of inspiration but ultimately left me kind of - well, like when you eat chinese food, an hour later "what's in the fridge". I did not like the ending of Super 8, and the whole thing with the renegade Romulan in Star Trek was offputting. I rate Super 8 slightly above Star Trek, good popcorn movies both, but I'm not eagerly awaiting the DVD.

I read the Gary Westfahl Super 8 review mentioned by SHINYGOODGUY and picked some quotes:
What’s wrong with a film that artfully redacts some earlier films for young audiences who may not be familiar with the originals? Even an uninformed viewer, I suspect, can detect the difference between a story drawn from real experiences and a story constructed solely out of exhausted tropes. . . . if you try to make a crudely derivative film enlivened by ingenious special effects, the result will not always be successful entertainment. Yet in a sense, that is exactly what Abrams has done. - Gary Westfahl www.locusmag.com/Reviews/2011/06/familiar-invaders-a-review-of-super-8/

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity," where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

HKCAVALIER

Wednesday, June 15, 2011 8:18 AM

I really don't get how upset folk are that J.J. dared to do a movie that takes place in the late 70's and model it on the works of Steven Spielberg from the same era. SACRILEDGE!!!

It's a sweet/scary/thoughtful movie about the brutality we humans are all too quick to unleash on "the other," first in the name of science and later in the name of military control. It's a story as old as Frankenstein and Abrams is obviously very fond of the theme.

I really don't know where the hell people are coming from saying that the movie has no soul or is "mindless fun." Did none of you care about the two young protagonists? Were none of you moved by the resolution of the relationship between the two fathers?

If you care at all about Spielberg's actual movies (as opposed to the fanboi Church of Steve) you can see that the resemblance to Spielberg is formal, not thematic. There's no Christ figure in Super 8. That the alien has empathy for human beings and eats them isn't a contradiction--do all the meat eaters on this forum deny the suffering of cows and pigs? I should hope not. Do you still eat them? Of course you do. Abrams, I think, is actually interested in writing a story about an alien creature.

Anyway. I liked the movie fine. It wasn't a big movie. No one's gonna mistake it for the Second Coming. But it evoked the time period vividly, had a handful of excellent performances and told a good story along classic (pre-Spielberg) themes.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

ECGORDON

Wednesday, June 15, 2011 1:12 PM

Everything you say is true, but that is also my point. It's all been done before. It's like a leftover script that Spielberg never got around to directing or producing in the 80s. When is the homage so heavy that it becomes theft?

But please note that at the end of my review I state that most people will like this movie for what it is and it will be considered a success.

STORYMARK

Wednesday, June 15, 2011 3:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
It's all been done before.

Which is true for about 99% of stories.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

HKCAVALIER

Wednesday, June 15, 2011 4:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
When is the homage so heavy that it becomes theft?

Well, it sure isn't theft when the guy you're supposedly stealing from is a good friend of yours and the producer on your film. Again, we're ascribing some sort of villainy to J.J. Abrams. Folks are acting like Spielberg is some nice old lady on the street who gets her purse snatched by Abrams and they want to be the first to punch him out and give it back to her. Just makes 'em look foolish. There is nothing new under the sun and Spielberg doesn't own schmaltzy music, misunderstood monsters and bike riding teenagers.

Me, I was fascinated by the similarities to 70's Spielberg and the differences. I found the family scenes much more naturalistic in this film than in Spielberg's stuff from that era. And the story of the man-eating alien was far less sentimental than Spielberg would have dreamed of making at the time.

Film makers have relationships with one another. Sometimes they're close friends and their aesthetics overlap. Spielberg had a close relationship with Stanley Kubrik and made A.I. and the film geeks were unmercifully critical. Now it's Abrams' turn to get roasted for collaborating with a mentor. It doesn't make sense.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

ECGORDON

Thursday, June 16, 2011 12:43 AM

We could go round and round on this for days and nothing would be accomplished. Truth be told, I was never that fond of a lot of the Spielberg films that Super 8 stole from, so why should I like it when it is a retread ten times over?

Spielberg has made far more bad films than good, both as director and producer, but I still think he has incredible talent. That's why this type of thing disappoints me.

To answer an earlier question, no I was not that moved by the emotional scenes in this movie. They were well acted by both Fanning and Courtney, but they were also calculated and manipulative in that way as has been the case with many Spielberg films. One hug between father and son at the end of the movie does not constitute a great emotional milestone, and the deputy deciding to stop hating Alice's father for what happened to his wife...also not a resolution that moved me in any way.

Contrast that with Firefly and Serenity. I doubt even Joss would say he didn't have quite a few other influences for those stories, but he and the other writers and the cast made it live and breathe. We took those journeys and shared the adventures with those characters because they seemed so real. That is why Serenity actually had a great emotional impact on me, but Super 8 just left me cold.

PREV PAGE 1 2