Wanted to be a Spielberg Film SOO BADLY
Just saying it did. It's not enough that he produced this film, it just wanted to be one of his films and not original at all. It sorta like the first Poltergeist.
This movie was supposed to be a homage to Spielberg films. So it wasn't supposed to be very original.
share[deleted]
"It was also supposed to be good, and it failed to do that as well."
You are, of cuyrse, entitled to your opinion, as I am entitled to DISAGREE with it, if I so choose. And I do.
[deleted]
2+2=4 there now it's not all opinion.
shareWrong. We can say factually incorrect things. Not everything is a matter of opinion. The inherent quality of something, for example, is not a matter of opinion. You can like or dislike something, but your opinion of it doesn't affect it's inherent quality.
Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!
http://www.bodylovewellness.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/well-thats- just-like-your-opinion-man-gif-the-dude-lebowski.gif
shareAs to what your opinion of the movie is, some people like butter on their bread. I can't stand butter on my bread.
Spielberg contributed to the story treatment and was on the set a lot as executive producer.
As to what your opinion of the movie is, some people like butter on their bread. I can't stand butter on my bread. I like this film very much.
Spielberg contributed to the story treatment and was on the set a lot as executive producer.
Spielberg produced film to be a Spielberg homage done by a Spielberg studio.
-'Human intelligence' is an oxymoron-
I'm a huge Spielberg fan, and a huge fan of films in general. The 80s may be my personal favorite decade for movies.
In my opinion, not only was Super 8 the best film in years, but I am convinced that Abrams did not direct it all by himself. I truly believe that Spielberg was on the set of this movie giving input.
I don't think it only tried to be a Spielberg film. I think it damn-near was. Dare I suggest, this now-forgotten-and-swept-under-the-radar movie is a better film than E.T. and The Goonies. Obviously E.T. and The Goonies are remembered longer, but that has more to do with the fact that they had more memorable quirks than Super 8.
I noticed that folks seem to think that the more remembered movie out of a pair is automatically the better one. This is not true. Just because Schindler's List is remembered still while Munich is now practically forgotten, does not mean that the former is necessarily a better film than the latter. A movie can be more memorable than another for a variety of reasons. Beetlejuice is not necessarily a better film than Big Fish just because it is remembered while the latter has been quietly forgotten.
I hope for more films like S8. I won't be holding my breath.
I'm not a control freak, I just like things my way
I am convinced that Abrams did not direct it all by himself. I truly believe that Spielberg was on the set of this movie giving input.
Being highly familiar with films and various filmmakers' styles, I must state for the record that I believe Spielberg seriously influenced this movie on the actual set.
He may have gone as far as directly directing some of the actors themselves. I'm talking beyond what DVD extra behind-the-scenes footage will show us. We may never know exactly. But if Abrams never goes on to direct another movie as magical, down-to-Earth, charming, and as fresh as this one, then it may be all the indication I need.
I've never seen any other Abrams film, except maybe parts of MI:III, which was fairly bad.
I'm not a control freak, I just like things my way
I don't believe that's true. If Spielberg really directed some of the scenes himself, then the kids would have mentioned this. But according to them, he was only on the set a few times.
I think you are being clearly unfair with JJ Abrams. "Super 8" was actually only the third feature film he directed, after "Mission Impossible 3" and "Star Trek". But those two movies were from a different genre, so it doesn't make much sense to compare them with "Super 8". Before that his body of work consisted mostly in producing and writing TV shows, like "Alias", "Lost" and "Fringe".
Besides, JJ Abrams did not only direct "Super 8", but he also wrote the screenplay. It is his must personal movie yet. Because he made super 8 movies himself as a kid and was a huge fan of Spielberg's films. Obviously he never made a secret about what a huge influence he was for making "Super 8". But apart from that, JJ had enough competence to make the movie himself.
I don't understand.
I just admitted that S8 is the only film by him I have seen. I stopped watching MI3 halfway through. What have I been unfair about?
I just find it difficult to believe that Spielberg's style could be pulled off to a 'T' as in the case of this movie. You talk about what the kids mention or don't mention, but it's not really difficult to cover things up or just not mention things. They could be grazing over the truth, or those "few times" they speak of could be key moments that scream Spielberg. Who knows...
I'm not a control freak, I just like things my way
You are being unfair because you are basically claiming that a movie, that is credited as being "written and directed by JJ Abrams", was in fact not really made by him. That is not a fair accusation, specially when you don't have any prove for that.
So, you believe in a conspiracy to cover up that this movie was in fact mostly directed by Spielberg? No offense, but that is a ridiculous idea. If Spielberg really directed "Super 8", then they would have simply mentioned it while promoting the film. The movie would have made probably much more money, because the simply fact of a movie being directed by Spielberg attracts people to go watch the film.
Besides, Spielberg was surely very busy directing "The Adventures of Tintin" and "War Horse" at the time.
You are being unfair because you are basically claiming that a movie, that is credited as being "written and directed by JJ Abrams", was in fact not really made by him.I never said it wasn't really directed by him. I said that I believe Spielberg had lots of on-the-set influence, and I stand by that belief.
Besides, Spielberg was surely very busy directing "The Adventures of Tintin" and "War Horse" at the time.Yet he wasn't too busy to show up on the set a few times.
I never said it wasn't really directed by him. I said that I believe Spielberg had lots of on-the-set influence, and I stand by that belief.
I just simply don't believe that Abrams was able to get Spielberg's directorial and hearty style down to a "T" so well.
But to go on set and to take directly charge of action, would be just interrupting JJ Abrams authority.Ooh, I see what you're saying. Well, that's not the way I envisioned it happening.
You are probably not very famiiar with JJ Abrams, because yourself admit that you don't even finished watching MI3.I stopped watching MI3 because it was a fairly bad movie.
But if he is known for one thing as a director, then it is his over-use of lens flares. This movie is a huge example of this, specially on those scenes filmed in the night. So I see on "Super 8" much more from JJ's directional style, than from Spielberg's.I wasn't referring to a technical style as much as I was referring to S8's degree of charm, heart, and down-to-Earth characters. The storytelling style, how everything builds up gradually, but never too slowly or quickly, it all screams Spielberg.
I was referring to S8's degree of charm, heart, and down-to-Earth characters. The storytelling style, how everything builds up gradually, but never too slowly or quickly, it all screams Spielberg.
Also, it is not that difficult to get a Spielberg-feeling on your movie. All you have to do is to watch "The Goonies", "ET" and "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" all the time, and then take the best of those movies for your movie.While I'm sure there's some truth to this, it is far easier said than done. If that was the case, Directors would pull it off time and time again. Two movies that have done it (and done it well) in the last twelve years come to mind: Signs and Super 8.
What you are mentioning has much more to do with the writing of the screenplay than with the directing of the movie. On "Super 8" JJ Abrams also wrote the screenplay for the movie. And the irony is that even on Spielberg's great movies, he rarely wrote the screenplays himself.I am fully aware of this. But even Hollywood's biggest-named writers and directors oftentimes have things ghostwritten into their scripts by execs or suggestions that they are forced to throw in.
To imply that Spielberg didn't at the very least develop this project alongside Abrams is just downright lack of knowledge of film business. All movies are developed by a team of execs and Producers in direct communication with the filmmaker himself.
Yes, but even so, some Producers are known as more "hands-on" than others.
Some Producers are known to be less hands-on than others.
I believe Spielberg was Producer on this project, on paper. But spiritually, I believe he was a co-collaborator of sorts.
It's sort of like the Poltergeist situation, or the Nightmare Before Christmas situation with Tim Burton and Henry Selick.
I'm not a control freak, I just like things my way
I believe Spielberg was Producer on this project, on paper. But spiritually, I believe he was a co-collaborator of sorts.
Of course. But, as I said, different Producers are less or more hands-on than others. Or, "More involved" may be a better term.
Here's the main thing: I loved Super 8 so much, and I dislike modern cinema so much, that I would love nothing more than for this movie to have been primarily masterminded by JJ Abrams. Because then it would mean that there is a good chance he could pull off another work of magic again. And that's what I want. I want to be optimistic.
Unfortunately, after seeing his resume, I see virtually nothing that suggests any such gold. There is no indication that this isn't just a one-hit thing. I am not a big "Star Wars" or "Star Trek" person, so instantly I'm counted out (I would think folks might enjoy more original, fresh projects anyway, and less things that are already a franchise). If he was going to direct awesome stuff, I feel he would have done so by now.
I'm not saying he can't do it again, I'm just saying I'm doubtful. I believe Spielberg's touches made this film what it is. I would love for Abrams to prove me wrong. Because I know Spielberg won't be around forever.
I'm not a control freak, I just like things my way
The fact that you don't see other movies like "Super 8" on Abrams' resume (or in any other contemporary director) has not much to do with the fact that he is supposedly not capable of making movies like those. It's just that this is one of those "been there, done that" genres. You don't even see Spielberg himself making this type of movies these days.
Besides, you already made it clear that you absolutely loved "Super 8". But not everyone agrees with you. The movie only has a 7.2/10 IMDb-rating. Which is good, but nothing special. While his other movie, "Star Trek" (in which you are not very interested), has a rating of 8.0/10.
I think that the problem here is simply that you disagree with the movie tastes of most people these days. But it is completely normal that today's directors try to follow those tastes.
I like how you start by claiming you are "highly familiar with films and various filmmakers' styles" and then at the end mention you've "never seen any other Abrams film, except maybe parts of MI:III."
So, you admit you are not familiar with JJ Abrams' work at all, meaning you have no way of knowing whether he's capable of directing something like Super 8 without direction from Spielberg.
I like how you start by claiming you are "highly familiar with films and various filmmakers' styles" and then at the end mention you've "never seen any other Abrams film, except maybe parts of MI:III."Are you mathematically challenged? When we were holding this discussion, the man had only three films. One of them I've seen. Another I shut off halfway through. What else was there for me to see? You mean to imply that watching one more film would clue me in to whether or not the man is "capable of directing something like Super 8 without direction from Spielberg"? Doubtful; especially considering the following...
So, you admit you are not familiar with JJ Abrams' work at all, meaning you have no way of knowing whether he's capable of directing something like Super 8 without direction from Spielberg.
"I do love this movie though, and I even hope he and Spielberg team up again for another similarly magical film."
I'd be hoping that if he worked with Spielberg again, we'd be seeing more of Abrams' original work and ideas and less of a product consciously fashioned on Spielberg's stuff.
If you're going to copy stuff Spielberg is a wonderful model, but Abrams, based on his developing portfolio, wouldn't need to go down that path again IMO.
Spielberg was only on set three days because he was making War Horse at the time.
shareThere is usually a reason why some films are remembered and some quietly forgotten...I find it is usually because the one remembered is better.
"No I don't wonder Marty. The world needs bad men, we keep the other bad men from the door".
I guess there is nothing wrong in trying to make a Spielberg type film. He is at an age where younger film-maker want to emulate his style.
Its that man again!!
Abrams SUCKS as a feature film director. This movie was a bastardized version of Spielberg's "ET". Horrible! Abrams has never been known as being "original".
Most anything he has ever done has been so derivative. Abrams need to stick to producing TV and leave the feature business to the boys who wear long pants!
Ridiculous thread, it's a film produced by Spielberg... it's amazing how some people just love hating on things
That's it!
I did a fan edit of this movie that I called The Spielberg Edit, and while it's not Steven Spielberg's film, it is probably the closest thing to it. I re-scored the film with John Williams' music from E.T. and Close Encouters, using tracks that had previously been unreleased or not used in the films. I also subtracted a few things I thought were much more JJ Abrams.
shareThat's Noticeable. Perhaps it was aiming at the nostalgia factor, so I'm definitely not its target audience. All in all a pretty mediocre movie with some effective smoke and mirrors advertising.
sharePerhaps it was aiming at the nostalgia factor,It totally was. The movie is great when you have lived through the classic Spielberg years and also have witnessed how homevideo became Youtube. In fact the whole alien story is just a canvas to create that picture.
And it was about ten times better than almost anything he's put out in the last 15 years..
share