Reactions: “Super 8”
It’s the only ‘original’ (i.e., non-sequel, remake, adaptation) major studio movie of the summer with some big names attached as writer-director (J.J. Abrams) and producer (Steven Spielberg). I’ve pimped it a lot on GITS, primarily because the subject matter and creative minds involved interest me, and to support more ‘original’ movies.
Now the movie has opened. I was away on a trip from Thursday until tonight, so haven’t seen it yet, but want to hear your reactions.
What did you think of Super 8?
UPDATE: Robert Pilkington has this post on his blog (Heroes Are Boring) re Super 8:
Pre-release, Super 8 operated on an assumption. By boiling Spielberg down to a brand, something that can be easily replicated, a label you can slap on something he’s not even making, the filmmakers tried to play it just as safe as any comic book or nostalgia film. And Jesus, don’t these people realize that, for young movie goers (certainly ones watching MTV), the last Spielberg pictures they saw were fucking terrible? A.I.? War of the Worlds? Indy 4? If “Spielberg” is a product, we’ve certainly found traces of lead in it by now.
So no, I don’t think Super 8 is some miracle script among a sea of prequels and reboots, or means dick to any of us hoping specs will have a significant role in summer box offices to come. This kinda thing’s happened a lot before and it’s going to happen a lot again. So this summer, when it comes time to buy your ticket, will you choose to see the movie pandering to an audience it assumes it will have, or another movie pandering to audience it assumes it have?
Of course, I’ve yet to see the movie, so any comments I make at this point are originating from bodily points somewhere in the vicinity of my arse, but here’s an interesting question: If Spielberg isn’t making early-Spielberg films anymore, what’s wrong with other directors making them? There are lots of reasons why early-Spielberg films worked. What’s wrong with creative types feeding at that trough if there’s still plenty of food for thought there?
I will know more after I see the movie. Until then, continue to have at it with your opinions.
UPDATE #2: Vulture with some thoughts on how Super 8 defied poor pre-opening tracking numbers and had a solid first weekend.
UPATE: #3: Per my question above, see this article from Zeitchik (24 Frames):
Although it’s set in 1979 and doesn’t share a specific title with any movies from the “me decade,” “Super 8” is a 1980s film to the core. It plumbs the depths of that pre-Internet, early-fanboy era as much as any film in recent memory. And it contains more references to “E.T,” “”Stand by Me” and “The Goonies” — for many who came of age in the 1980s, the holy trinity of popcorn cinema — than a VH1 special.
Yet despite the film’s determinedly backward glances, critics generally liked it (an 82% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes), with prominent reviewers saying things such as “If you’re wondering what’s missing from so many big-budget, effects-driven Hollywood movies, the answer lies in J.J. Abrams’ ‘Super 8.’”
Audiences, meanwhile, came out in sizable numbers. The movie’s $37-million weekend is the biggest opening of any live-action movie not based on a preexisting brand this year — a list that, while small, includes “Bridesmaids,” “Just Go With It” and “Battle: Los Angeles.” “Super 8” also had the best opening in nearly 20 years for any film Steven Spielberg has produced or directed that wasn’t based on an existing brand, topping efforts such as “A.I.” and “Saving Private Ryan.”
In the ‘similar but different’ world, not only of Hollywood [specifically], but storytelling [generally], it appears Abrams [and Spielberg] hit paydirt with an homage to notable 80s movies.