Where to begin on “Super 8?” It’s so clearly the kind of film directors tend to make, unmolested, after a major hit, the kind where someone really needed to be pulling the strings and smoothing the edges and seeing the forest through the trees. “But I’m J.J. f***ing Abrams.” (I’m sure he’s a splendid chap.)
It’s a nostalgia wank, but you already knew that. I find myself wondering if the pitch meeting was little more than Abrams promising Steven Spielberg that the famed director’s oeuvre would be all but gilded and bronzed right there on the screen. But that can be forgiven…if there’s a story.
And there’s not. Well, there’s not a complete story. There’s a lot of mayhem that feels injected into a coming-of-age yarn that itself needed some tinkering, and then there’s a climax that is meant to bring it all together, but ultimately whiffs worse than Begbie’s scratch in “Trainspotting.”
The “script” for this film is like a frame made of fishing wire, so flimsy the high concept stuff (which definitely could have used some more time in the oven) weighs it past the breaking point. I found myself looking for reasons throughout to just forgive the film its hastiness because there is some great child acting on display, some genuinely visionary filmmaking craft and an overall vibe I wanted to submit to.
But that climax. God. It might be one of the worst-conceived in a film of this sort. Sinks the whole ship. Reveals the stark-naked emperor.
What’s really unsettling is that the nostalgia thing — which could be on the dangerous precipice of becoming a trend — begins to feel exploitative after a while. When I saw an arbitrary Batman poster on a character’s wall, I started to wonder if Abrams has simply found the pulse, picked his spot and mined the flow. He might be a legitimate geek, but he also knows how to push the right geek buttons, whether they’re organic to his story or not.
I was going to get into spoiler stuff, but I can’t really drum up the interest to do so. There are so many unmotivated instances (“We have to get to the cemetery! Let’s go through this neighborhood so we can have an out-of-place set-piece and go into this house because we’re seeing all these other houses get destroyed!”), so much potential squandered (the central puppy-love story betrays Elle Fanning’s clear talent by establishing her as little more than a cipher — and don’t get me started on Coach Taylor) and such an undercooked narrative that it’s kind of depressing to wallow in the specifics.
(On the lens flares: I dug them in “Star Trek.” They served a purpose in that film, i.e., to give the impression that there was always something exciting happening just off screen. It was thoughtful. Here, they’re borderline self-referential, and simply don’t make stylistic sense.)
Ultimately I think Abrams might have done well to cut back on the sci-fi “bigness” of this project, accoutrement that literally serves no thematic purpose, and scale it back to his interesting characters and how their lives play out in this sort of Stephen King-like community. But the movie is what it is, and despite being a spectacle film that will draw attention and ought to have redeeming characteristics in that vein, I would have a hard time recommending “Super 8” at all. It’s far too unsatisfying on even the most basic storytelling level. It might not be a bad film (though I wonder), but it’s definitely not a good one.
(Readers who will no doubt ask about Oscar potential: It’ll be in a contender for Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing and Best Visual Effects. Some consideration might circle Michael Giacchino’s score. I would discontinue talk of anything else whatsoever.)
ADDENDUM (6/10): The comments section indicates the level of umbrage some took with my perspective on this heavily anticipated film. I’m sensing that something I originally felt didn’t need saying, probably needs saying after all: I welcome any filmmaker’s vision that attempts to draw a line of tangible emotion through what would otherwise be little more than an entertainment. J.J. Abrams has succeeded in at least sparking that rarity this summer, and maybe others will look to this example — however not-quite-there I might believe it to be — as inspiration to go there, too. It’s a business of dollars, but I honestly believe it’s also a business where good intentions are more often there than not, so while I’d actually pay for a summer without something like “Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides,” I’d equally pay for a summer WITH something like “Super 8.”
[Photo: Paramount Pictures]
Comments
142 responses to “Super h8ed it”
shame…
Worst news I’ve heard in a while. I hope Abrams isn’t M.Nighting himself.
I’m beginning to question your taste, Kris. I think I’ll listen to the majority on this one.
Kris and Devin Faraci have both trashed it, and I they are two reviewers I respect a lot when it comes to sci-fi. I look forward to hearing what Garth Franklin has to say, but if it’s 3 nos, I’ll have a hard time buying a ticket.
tony: Question all you want. (Also: What majority? The geek choir to which J.J. is preaching?)
Sawyer: I believe Garth was underwhelmed. I think I saw some Tweet from him or something.
Well, this is disappointing. I’m still going to see it and judge for myself, but a negative review for a film you’re really anticipating is pretty disheartening. Hopefully I’ll get more out of it than you did.
Let’s face it, Kris doesn’t have an original idea in his head. He does his best to feel the room and then picks the opposite. I gave up on him years ago and Guy is the only reason I visit this site.
***(Also: What majority? The geek choir to which J.J. is preaching?)***
Well, considering the film is getting a large majority great reviews (so far), probably the critical majority.
The way it should be done:
“I’m still going to see it and judge for myself, but a negative review for a film you’re really anticipating is pretty disheartening. Hopefully I’ll get more out of it than you did.”
The way it shouldn’t be done:
“Let’s face it, Kris doesn’t have an original idea in his head. He does his best to feel the room and then picks the opposite. I gave up on him years ago and Guy is the only reason I visit this site.”
Amazing, the dichotomy in consecutive comments. Like the difference between a grown-up enjoying a meal and a toddler smearing his face with mashed potatoes.
Though I wonder. I honestly expect a similar reaction from Guy. Which will make the second comment above totally hilarious.
(For the record, I had really high hopes for the film and was heartened by the amount of positive reviews out of geek press last week and even thought Devin’s pan was a sign I’d love it. Alas, I guess I “did my best to read the room and picked the opposite.” What kind of a trollish moron thinks a person honestly does something like that, anyway?)
Interesting. It really smelled like a best picture nominee…
It’ll no doubt leave more room for War Horse and Tintin.
And Kris, did you ever see the LemonLyman episode of the West Wing? Internet comment boards sure can be a crazy place.
“h8ed it” Kris? It really seems like you’re trying to go down a certain path.
What path is that? The “I can’t think of a better headline” path? Then yeah, I guess so.
I was being facetious. I remember you said that to Guy after he panned 127 Hours.
I get kicks out of the talk back that results from reviews like this and the aforementioned 127 Hours review.
I’m not entirely surprised. Most of the positive reviews I’ve read have said that the film has issues.
Matt: I thought maybe that’s what you were referring to after I replied. Sorry.
In any case, I have a strong feeling many of you will at least see where I’m coming from when you see the film this weekend.
I was looking forward to this even though I thought Star Trek was atrocious. Now I’m thinking I’ll probably skip it.
Our opinions on movies intersect 90% of the time. So I’m afraid I can remove this one from my anticipated list…
What a shame. I love Friday Night Lights and hate to see Coach Taylor mentioned in the same sentence as “potential squandered.”
Bummers. I’m still believing that my general opinion of the film will all come down to how good I think the main children worked in this film.
To me, there’s nothing more like a cinematographic nails-on-a-chalkboard like an annoying or unfocused kid protagonist. That CJ kid from The Blind Side… hated that brat. Hated him. HATE!!!
As long as they work nicely enough, I think I can forgive a few hiccups from the story itself. Can’t wait to check it out.
Chad: “I thought Star Trek was atrocious”. Please, explain, I’m trying very hard to wrap my brain around the choice of adjective there. Even with your questionable taste considered, that seems extreme.
Kris: As much as I enjoy hearing your take on any given film, I’m hoping you’re dead wrong about this one, being that it’s the only summer movie I was looking forward to.
Sorry to hear that you hated it Kris. I will be catching a screening of the film tonight and I still have high hopes for it. But it looks like it won’t be a film that is universally embraced (critically that is). I wouldn’t discount it out of the race yet either, I mean if The Blind Side got in then anything can, IMO
Well Kris, this is disappointing, as Super 8 was the film I was most looking forward to this summer. I’m still going to see it and hope that perhaps I perceive it differently, but seeing as our tastes are fairly similar, I’m a bit worried.
I saw it at a screening and thought it was pretty great. I agree with Kris more often than not and always enjoy what he has to say, but I don’t agree with him here… at all.
“I find myself wondering if the pitch meeting was little more than Abrams promising Steven Spielberg that the famed director’s oeuvre would be all but gilded and bronzed right there on the screen.”
That’s not the case at all. In fact, Abrams went out of his way in the video interviews to point out that the movie was NOT a tribute to Spielberg but a tribute to their shared experience of making movies as kids.
Perharps the issue is that you are approaching the thing from the wrong angle.
I have been dabbling in this blog-board racket for a while now and I don’t believe I’ve ever seen people defend a film they haven’t seen so vehemently or maliciously. malicious defense should be a paradoxical statement but I guess not. At least with the Dark Knight the immature brats had Batman Begins to go on ahead of time.
***… I don’t believe I’ve ever seen people defend a film they haven’t seen so vehemently or maliciously.***
Have you ever been to rottentomatoes.com?
“Perharps the issue is that you are approaching the thing from the wrong angle.”
Or perhaps I don’t gobble and digest everything spun out of the PR wing of a film.
You are so classic Kris, I know what to say and when. This is why you will be nothing more than a blogger. Always willing to criticize, can’t handle a single moment of criticism. An industry joke, every word haunts you.
Thanks for the laugh and why doesn’t Guy have his own site?
I saw Super 8 this past weekend at a sneak preview. I thought the kids in the movie were great and ultimately what saved the movie. However, the screening I was at seemed very positive about the movie overall.
I think Abrams is a solid director, but he needs better scripts.
DylanS- No use getting too into it, but I didn’t like a single thing about the movie. Except the two leads had good charisma.
If I don’t find enjoyment in the film, at least I’ll always find pleasure from the ignorant back and forth hatred that these comments sections usually bring.
Just because the guy who wrote this review didnt like it doesnt mean its not good! Go See It People! Its getting really good reviews! Maybe you should watch it again Kris Tapley! And just stop being such a critic and enjoy the movie!
reallydude: You know “what to say and when?” I don’t get it. Am I supposed to be reacting in some way that legitimizes that statement? There seems to be some backstory in your head here that isn’t translating.
And in any case, if the central point is criticism, I can handle criticism fine. When it’s actual criticism and not just offensive blather. But Paramount appreciates your efforts.
You’re right about one thing, though. Guy deserves his own spotlight. Though I gather he’s happy here.
I’ll go see it anyway, if it means a vote for continued success for Coach Taylor.
I’m loving Kris’s snarkiness on this thread of replies. Defending a movie you haven’t even seen strikes me as somewhere near the height of irrationality and stupidity. But, each to their own. This is the interwebs after all.
As for the film itself, I was not massively excited for it. I loved Star Trek, but i’ve been underwhelmed by other Abrams stuff. Plus, the title seemed to offer little more than a nostalgia film, which does not appeal to me at all.
Well… at least it’s not a sequel. Or a comic book adaptation.
sigh…well if this review rings true, then there really isn’t much point in going to the movies this summer. At least there’s Dragon Tattoo and Hugo Cabret (as long as they’re solid features) for the winter.
I don’t get why people are criticizing Kris for criticizing a film they themselves haven’t even seen. I’d have to see the film myself before I could tell whether or not I agree with Kris. And so what if his opinion does not mimic that of the majority? That doesn’t make his opinion any less valid.
It seems a shame that Chandler always ends up getting one-note parts. The man can act, let him.
accoutrement
There’s a word you don’t see everyday.
I was on the fence about “Super 8” anyhow — I was planning to wait for it on DVD. I’ll wait for more reviews to come down the line. And perhaps a more in-depth review here?
I don’t have a problem with nostalgia. I mean George Lucas became famous because of American Graffiti which was a nostalgic look at a period in his life. Same for Star Wars and Indy with pulps and adventure serials. Those things often aren’t criticized simply because we did not live through those times. All filmmakers are influenced by what they grew up with.
As someone who detested MI:3 and Star Trek I can’t say i’m surprised. Someday someone will explain to me why someone completely lacking Spielberg’s cinematic sense is lauded as his natural heir.
Eh, I’ll still see it. I can’t count Abrams out without seeing it myself.
If you’re an Abrams-phile, I totally get that you want to see it for yourself. But I’ve made the mistake of defending movies before just because I wanted to like them, and after multiple viewings, I had to admit the films were simply not good. Anything George Lucas has done in the past 15 years would be a good example of this.
If David Fincher or Christopher Nolan made a film that Kris Tapley or Garth Franklin or anyone didn’t like, I’d still see it. But I’d like to believe I would keep an open mind about the movie’s quality, at least eventually. :)
I’m completely dumbfounded by the gullible idiots on this board saying, “Oh, Kris hated it, so I’m not gonna watch the film anymore”!
Give the movie a chance and form *your own opinion*, for God’s sake.
I hate to be the cynical awards prognosticator on this discussion, but I have to ask:
Kris, do you think most people will *eventually* take the negative point of view on the film (à la Superman Returns) and kill its awards season chances, or are you seeing yourself as more in the minority on this and Oscars are still in the cards?
Oh crap, that’s what I get for not bothering to read the parenthesis. Nevermind.
For the life of me I simply don’t understand why Abrams has received the attention he has. He’s a TV director with TV sensibilities. Shaking a camera about and then washing the screen in lens flares to disguise the fact that nothing you shot cuts together in any meaningful way is not the sign of a talented film-maker. This guys as ‘good’ as Peter Berg, McG, Marcus Nispel etc. He’s just playing at film-making.
Shane – I agree with Abrams not actually being much of a director. But are we still using “TV’ to condescend? In an era when Tim Van Patten and others are bringing the good stuff to that medium?