Film Festival

Review: 'Super 8' offers up charming character piece with soft alien story

As a mystery, it fizzles, but as a piece about young friendship, it flies

Review: 'Super 8' offers up charming character piece with soft alien story

Elle Fanning and Joel Courtney are two of the young leads in the new JJ Abrams film 'Super 8'

Credit: Paramount

It should come as no surprise to anyone who has seen the trailers for the new JJ Abrams film "Super 8" that there is a heavy sense of nostalgia at the heart of the movie, but that's not all there is to it.  While I may not be on the "loves it unreservedly" end of things, I think "Super 8" has much to recommend it, and it is a lovely next step for Abrams as a filmmaker.

"Super 8" tells the story of a group of young friends who are making a zombie film together in the late '70s when they accidentally capture a terrifying train accident on film.  During the accident, something escapes from the train and begins to wreak havoc on their small town, and the kids find themselves at ground zero for an incident that changes their perception of the world around them.  That's the plot, and it's fairly straightforward.  There's no big giant twist that is being protected by the ad campaign, but that's not the sort of film it is.  I think people get wound up by how close Abrams plays his cards, and they build a film like this or "Cloverfield" up to be something it's not before they ever see it.

"Super 8" is a fairly modest affair as summer movies go, and in that way, it definitely feels more like the summer movies I grew up watching.  In an age where summer films routinely cost $200 million or more, and each new movie feels like a contest to see how much they can crank up the spectacle, it's nice to see a film that seems relatively scaled back, focused on character first.  The first shot of the film is a factory floor, where someone is changing the sign that reads "Days since last accident on the job."  They erase the 174 and write in a 1.  And just like that, Joe Lamb (Joel Courtney) finds himself without a mother, alone with his father, Deputy Sheriff Jackson Lamb (Kyle Chandler), emotionally devastated.  He turns to his friends to try and get over the accident, losing himself in the act of moviemaking.

The stuff the film gets dead right involves the young friends and their love of filmmaking.  It taps some of the same spirit that made "Son Of Rambow" such a treat, and setting the film in 1979 evokes a moment when many kids were just starting to get a look at the way films are made thanks to behind-the-scenes specials and magazines like Starlog, and just from the things we see in Joe's room, it's obvious he's been bitten by the bug, and hard.  Each of his friends brings a different enthusiasm or talent to the table.  There's Cary (Ryan Lee), whose love of explosives seems to be surpassed only by his enthusiasm for playing the undead.  Charles (Riley Griffiths) is a husky kid who loses himself when he gets behind the camera as a director.  And for Joe, putting make-up on the zombies seems to be almost therapeutic to him, a way to forget the real life death that has cast a shadow over him.

The problem is, his father doesn't approve.  I can relate.  I love my dad, and he's been very supportive of my career and my choices since I've moved to LA, but there was certainly a point in my life where my interests and his were at odds.  There was a period where I would not have been in trouble if he'd found a Playboy in my room, but a Fangoria would have sent him over the edge.  I would look at an issue of Fangoria and marvel at the work done by Tom Savini or Rick Baker or Rob Bottin, and to me, those guys were artists.  But when he looked at the magazine, all he saw was graphic violence and nightmarish imagery that genuinely upset him.  I'll admit a certain amount of satisfaction when I was able to send him an issue of Fangoria with the monster from "Pro-Life," my second episode of "Masters Of Horror," on the cover, and by that point, he'd reached a place where he could laugh about it and enjoy it as the accomplishment it is.  For Joe's father, he's having enough trouble figuring out how to talk to his son without having to navigate the disturbing terrain of this unfamiliar world he's becoming part of, and it worries him.  

There's one kid in particular that Joe's father is opposed to him spending time with, and of course, it's the one person that Joe is most drawn to, the lovely Alice Dainard (Elle Fanning), who Charles manages to talk into starring in the film as the wife of the police detective played with hilarious earnestness by Martin (Gabriel Basso).  Alice's father Louis (Ron Eldard) was the one who called in sick the day of the accident, which is why Joe's mother was working, and so Joe's father blames Louis for the accident.  It's a deep wound, and yet Joe and Alice get past it immediately.  The moment Joe sees Alice act, he has that lightning bolt moment.  In some ways, "Super 8" is about that moment in adolescence where we stop listening to everything our parents say and we start making choices, both good and bad, for ourselves, and Abrams does an excellent job of capturing that feeling of being out at night, doing something we know we shouldn't, but also fully enjoying the freedom.

Of course, very few of my illicit nights out involved train crashes or aliens.

Abrams has said in a few interviews that "Super 8" was originally two different ideas, and I'd believe that.  The alien half of the movie isn't badly staged, and there are a number of effective sequences involving whatever it was that escaped, but it feels a little undercooked to me, and if there's one big thing that it does wrong, it's the way they hold the reveal of the creature as long as they do.  It's one thing to keep the audience curious before you get them in the theater, but that entire section of the film feels like a trailer to me.  I love the notion of a benign creature that was captured decades ago that has been getting angrier and angrier while it waits for a way to get home.  I just wish we actually got to meet the creature as a character and not just as an effect.  I don't need the movie to be "E.T.," but as it is, the film feels unbalanced to the point of being deceptive.  I think the kids are more important, and they work beautifully together, but the way the material's handled now, the film doesn't quite earn the big finish that it builds to, and that's a shame.  Technically, the alien stuff is very effective and expertly accomplished, and there is a sense of mood that makes it feel like it's building towards something.  As long as you don't expect it to pay off in some bigger way, the ride is entertaining. 

If they had made the alien more of a character, his emotional journey could have played against Joe's in a way that really illuminated both of them, since they each have pain they have to get past, and although it feels like the film pushes that idea right at the finish, it doesn't get there organically.  Having said that, Joel Courtney, the kid who plays Joe, is a real discovery.  Natural and at ease with the most demanding emotional material Abrams throws at him, he feels like an old pro, and some of the film's most compelling moments are simple conversations between him and the always-good Kyle Chandler.  Elle Fanning is also quite striking here, and she seems to be developing into quite a performer, as natural as her older sister is mannered.  And because the human stuff is so good, I don't mind that the alien storyline doesn't quite gel.

After we saw it, I was driving home with my co-writer Scott, and he said that he imagined JJ Abrams sitting next to Spielberg on-set and, after every take, just turning to him and saying, "I love you."  I can see his point.  There is a profound love of the early films of Spielberg, palpable in every frame of the film and the staging of certain sequences.  There's one moment in particular where the kids decide to stage a scene in front of some soldiers, using them as extras in their movie, that has that same cheeky wit that marked films like "Jaws" and "Close Encounters" so clearly.  And yet, even with the influences as clear as they are, I think it's lazy to dismiss this as just nostalgia.  Much of what's going on in the film feels very specific and honest, and the nod to Spielberg is, more than anything, an acknowledgement that for people of a certain age, he was one of the people who woke this love of filmmaking, who inspired us to want to tell stories in the first place.  I am on the record as having little use for empty nostalgia, and honestly, that seems like the least important part of what this film is doing.  That's just a style, the language in which the story is being told.  It's not a game of "name that movie" as you're watching, and Abrams doesn't pack the movie with specific references.  I have a built-in gag reflex when it comes to feeling like I'm being pandered to, and that's the last thing I'd accuse Abrams of here.

"Super 8" isn't going to be the giant blockbuster event of the summer, and if you're looking for a nonstop creature feature, this ain't it.  But the film's gentle charms and young cast won me over, and in the end, this is a lovely look at getting over pain and letting go, wrapped in just a bit of sci-fi and wonder.

"Super 8" opens everywhere June 10, 2011.

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup


  • As a massive fan of Friday Night Lights, I've always felt that Kyle Chandler's work was kind of my own little secret. He was fantastic on that show. The microscopic audience for FNL will always baffle me. I'm genuinely excited that more people will get to enjoy his terrific work. "Abrams doing 80s Speilberg" isn't as a big of a draw for me as "Kyle Chandler as small town sheriff." Clear eyes, full hearts. . .

    June 1, 2011 at 3:14AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Matt C. ... CAN'T LOSE!

      The only way I'd be more excited to see this film is if the wonderful & beautiful Connie Britton cameoed as the mom.

      June 1, 2011 at 9:36AM EST
  • Phlogo_talkback_profile

    Playhouse

    I have to admit that the last few trailers/TV spots I've seen for the film have left me cold. The train wreck, in particular, feels too modern, noisy and pyrotechnic for the tone and look that the film seemed to be going for. I'm glad to hear that this focuses more on the characters than some big, twisty alien encounter/conspiracy. Also, that the sense of nostalgia, however light, truly informs the era of the story rather than serves as a self-aware Hallmark card to this past era of filmmaking. This gives me better hope for the film.

    June 1, 2011 at 3:20AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    John

    I think this review is the exact right tweaking of my expectations for this movie, and I'm looking forward to seeing it as much as ever.

    June 1, 2011 at 3:32AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    JAMMON

    I think there actually is a twist of sorts in this movie, but it is implied, not stated explicitly. You might have missed it, Drew. It's in the eyes.

    June 1, 2011 at 4:34AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Bear

    A-hole! This review is written by an A-hole! I was looking forward to seeing this movie and the curiosity of what's in the trailer car. But the frikkin' slug of this review shows up on the front page of IMDB with the word "Alien". I'm so sick of this crap! If you need to review a movie, review it. But when you give the secrets away in the slug of the article, I'm screwed. I'm going to see the title of the review whether I want to or not. My interest in seeing the movie just went in the toilet.

    June 1, 2011 at 4:52AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Chris I agree that there was TMI in the title for those who were looking forward to discovering the movie's secrets on their own, and it was bad form to put it all over the place where it couldn't be easily avoided. Having said that though, Bear, the rest of the review makes me think there's a lot more of value in this film than just the "reveal" moments so maybe you would still enjoy it after all if you gave it a chance. No need to completely dismiss it, maybe you might just find a different motivation for watching it.

      June 1, 2011 at 6:22AM EST
    • Shaggy_werewolf_talkback_profile

      That Werewolf Guy Well, even the very first teaser, that only showed the train crash, mentioned Area 51 right in the beginning. So if you ask me, mentioning the word "alien" in a headline, doesn't really count as spoiler at this point.

      June 1, 2011 at 6:45AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Kaylie Your complaining about the use of the word "alien?" SERIOUSLY?!?!? Haven't you seen any of the trailers or read ANYTHING about it online? What the heck did you think it was about? lol

      June 1, 2011 at 7:27AM EST
    • 500full_talkback_profile

      velocityknown Would it have made a difference if he'd said "monster" or "species that is not human"?
      I don't know, knowing Abrams track record and watching the trailers I kind of just assumed it was aliens. I definitely don't think that spoils the film.

      Basically, if your interest in the seeing the movie was just to find out what was in the train then you were about to waste 10 dollars.

      June 1, 2011 at 10:09AM EST
    • Werewolf Guy is right -- they were very specific in their references to Area 51 in that first trailer they gave us a year ago. Am I the only person who worked out of the assumption the movie involved aliens in some capacity?

      June 1, 2011 at 2:05PM EST


  • In a world where a summer blockbuster needs to cost $150 million, I'm happy to hear that Abrams and Spielberg made this for much less. I really hope the audience shows up for this one - it'll send a message to studios that people want characters and plot, too - not just spectacle.

    June 1, 2011 at 9:42AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Andrew

    I wished on some parts of your review you would have said spoiler alert. Thanks for ruining some of the surprise.

    June 1, 2011 at 11:14AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    mmcb105

    C'mon guys, all this talk about spoilers and such is nonesense. Drew didn't say anything in this review that, save for his evaluation of the performances and effectiveness of the film, couldn't be gleaned from the movie's own marketing campaign. Yeah, spoilers suck, but there aren't any here.

    June 1, 2011 at 11:31AM EST Reply to Comment
  • All_purpose_icon_talkback_profile

    drew

    This is not a spoiler-heavy review, and simply saying the word "alien" is not a spoiler. From the original ad campaign forward, "Area 51" has always been part of the marketing.

    Ultimately, what the few of you who are complaining are really asking for is an impossibility, a review that says nothing. Can't write that.

    I was careful, and I am confident that you can read my review, watch the movie, and still have it surprise you from minute to minute.

    June 1, 2011 at 12:48PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      ismith Sorry Drew. I saw your review up last week and went out of my way to avoid it and I'm glad I did. "I love the notion of a benign creature that was captured decades ago that has been getting angrier and angrier while it waits for a way to get home." is something I wouldn't have wanted to know about this movie. You could have talked about the work of the kids, the arc of the train wreck mystery not gelling for you and trying for an emotional hit without earning it, but when you go into specifics you rob us of the chance to have these things work for us or not. That's some arrogance there, mister. And while we're at it, releasing a review like this more than a week out blows. It's too far away to connect with what we can see in our theatres NOW (or at least tomorrow) and smacks more of "I know something you don't, nyah" rather than an informed review. I like your writing and I read your column, but if I see a review from you for a movie I'm looking forward to, I avoid it and come back to it AFTER I've seen it. I might not continue to do that if you continue to show such a lack of respect for the cold-viewing audience. You want to write a spoiler heavy analysis of a movie? Write two reviews and label them accordingly. I was totally down to read your breakdown of Inception and your take on the mechanics and structure and emotional journey of that film... after I had watched it. When are you people going to figure out that telling me there is a surprise at the end is still a spoiler, even if you don't tell me the surprise!

      June 10, 2011 at 4:11AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      ismith You want to read an informative yet spoiler-lite, respectful review? Ebert crushes it. And yet even he has been known to leak a plot point or two. Just sayin'...

      June 10, 2011 at 4:41AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Zennui

    Hi Drew. Thanks for the review. What's your take on age-appropriateness of this movie? I have a 7 and 9 year old that are dying to see it.

    June 1, 2011 at 1:17PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      leneb Mine are 9 and 11 and are dying to see it, I would like to know too. They watched both Transformers movies though...aside from colorful language it wasnt anything they couldnt see. So I am hoping the same with Super8

      June 2, 2011 at 1:11PM EST
    • All_purpose_icon_talkback_profile

      drew You should all be fine. My boys are still a little young for it, but older kids like the ones you mentioned should be just right.

      June 4, 2011 at 6:48PM EST
  • D6vcfgnmzaynelrqpgbpquhchgncey625xnivp-lx6j410bi7ecsbvkhqnr8nfoq_talkback_profile

    lightscameraachtung!

    I know Drew doesn't get into the ARG, but I posted your review to the Admin on the Super8news.com site. He's got a post up compiling all reviews and hasn't listed yours yet. Now to actually read the review. x-)

    June 1, 2011 at 2:09PM EST Reply to Comment


  • Yea, I had got some free press screening passes to see this Saturday and I was debating on if I wanted to go or not. I love movies to death, but I was a bit skeptical on if this would suffice as a good summer movie. But after reading this review, I think thats about what I expected. Meaning this isnt something Id pile up with friends to go see, but rather maybe by myself or on a date. I just couldnt really get the "tone" of the film from the way it was advertised. But Im going to go now. Ill even post a mini-review as well. Im not a professional or nothing, but I study film so I can at least give you my opinion from a "film addict" perspective,lol.

    June 1, 2011 at 2:19PM EST Reply to Comment


  • @Drew: This review isn't a spoiler....just freakin' sensative bloggers. You do your review pretty well. Ive read all your recent reviews(X-Men:First Class, Melancholia, Tree of Life) and you never offer spoilers anyway. You give us the basics of the plot that we have to guess about from the ads and trailers, but thats not a spoiler. That is setting the obvious expectation of the film, @Bear & @Andrew.

    June 1, 2011 at 2:25PM EST Reply to Comment
  • D6vcfgnmzaynelrqpgbpquhchgncey625xnivp-lx6j410bi7ecsbvkhqnr8nfoq_talkback_profile

    lightscameraachtung!

    Nice review.

    Ok, so my question is this. Did JJ purposely not focus on the alien in hopes of a sequel? Is this a stand alone film or does it hope to carry the storyline a little further?

    I know the alien in "Cloverfield" was panned and ridiculed to some extent. I just hope Abrams isn't already in the "play it safe" mode of his career.

    June 1, 2011 at 3:00PM EST Reply to Comment


  • It's really annoying the extent people complain about spoilers. I commented on a three or four year old movie few months ago, didn't even name the film, just the "twist," and someone weepily called me out on it, I think, simply to have some sense of higher ground.

    June 2, 2011 at 12:00AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    mmcb105

    Man, I'm guessing Drew is on vacation. Which sucks, because I hate trying to quit the motion captured blog cold turkey.

    June 3, 2011 at 1:08PM EST Reply to Comment
    • All_purpose_icon_talkback_profile

      drew Not a vacation, sir. Severe tonsillitis and some other health complications. I do apologize, and will get back to it ASAP.

      June 3, 2011 at 1:52PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      mmcb105 Damn, thats a bummer, hope you feel better...and thats not quite an altruistic wish, because for me that means you'll come back to the blog sooner. lol.

      June 3, 2011 at 5:11PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Bradley Valentine

    I hate when I spend a year or more (usually more since I started getting my news from the internet) anticipating a movie and then losing interest in it almost completely when the finished thing is nearly ready for consumption. I'm sitting here wondering how that massively promising JJ Abrams movie has become one I'll probably catch on the flip side. Damn. Still looking forward to Tree of Life. Tampa Theatre gets that on the 24th.

    June 5, 2011 at 5:16AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    JoeK

    People piling on this movie as nostalgia wank come across more calculating than Abrams imo.

    Nice review.

    June 10, 2011 at 11:21AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    mike matthews

    My family and I really enjoyed it. I was quite surprised other critics such as Devin at "Badass Digest" are really piling on the film.

    June 11, 2011 at 9:53PM EST Reply to Comment
Drew McWeeny

About This Blog

Los Angeles has changed since 1990, and Drew McWeeny, all-around Chauncey Gardner of movie fandom, has seen it all as an industry insider and screenwriter who wrote for 12 years as "Moriarty" for Ain't It Cool News.

Get Instant Alerts on Motion/Captured

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook