Super 8 (4K UHD + Digital)

“Super 8” was made as a summer adventure/Sci-fi film in 2011, aimed at a young audience, and as such should be fairly free from controversy., but the opposite is true. People seem to be passionately either for or against the film in a way unthinkable in previous decades. Over time, science fiction films went from low budget affairs strictly for kids to gigantically budgeted films of much greater significance; from trivial fare to films that attracted serious critical attention.Add to this the problems that arise with great expectations. “Super 8” came with an impeccable pedigree: producer Steven Spielberg and writer and director J.J. Abrams, the equivalent of royalty in the world of science fiction films. Spielberg everyone knows, but in this case it’s important to know that he was personally very involved in the project and was frequently on set. J.J. Abrams was already a major writer and producer who came out of television hits like “Felicity”, “Alias” and “Lost” before directing the first two “Star Trek” reboots, “Mission Impossible III” and “Cloverfield”. (He has stumbled somewhat with the last two “Star Wars” films, but that’s a fanbase that is impossible to please). Still, with expectations as high as they were, there was a big chance of disappointment.The film is an intentional homage to classic Spielberg of the late 70’s through early 80’s and as such is practically perfect. There are many literal references to Spielberg’s films that I won’t give away, but if I say it’s about a group of typical American suburban teenagers in 1979 who get involved in a mystery that involves a space alien, I think you get the picture. But there’s more to it than that. If you were to go to the theater without any knowledge beforehand, you would think you were watching a Spielberg film.All The Spielberg tropes are there. The setting in suburbia or a suburb-like small town, a place considered too mundane by most other directors, which Spielberg used to show that magical things can happen in the most ordinary places. The teenage central characters, a specific link to “E.T.” (in some ways you could call this film a dark version of “E.T.”), and the fact that in most of his less-serious adventure films there is at least one teen in the primary cast. Of course there is the alien being present as well as government interest with the government people here being far more serious than in “E.T.”, more like “Close Encounters” where they also stage an evacuation on false premises. Oh, and the first movie he ever made, at age 12, was about a train wreck, using his model trains.The kids even make their own movies, much as Spielberg did in his youth with “Firefly” and “Amblin” among others. As a map shows, the town is just north of Cincinnati, where Spielberg was born (though his family moved around the country a few years later). Abrams, no doubt with excellent advice, even achieves the look of a Spielberg film with camerawork, lighting and color. At one point a car races along in the foreground with a big, “Close Encounters” starry sky above.The film is a real success in summoning up the world of Spielberg, especially in “E.T.” and “Close Encounters” but how is it on its own? It mostly succeeds, especially in its first two thirds. The kids are differentiated enough and the central group (of 8) interact like real kids with conflicts, in-jokes and working together. The central character, Joe Lamb, isn’t the one directing the home movie, and that’s a nice touch. He’s also a rather quiet, slightly introverted boy into making models and is played that way convincingly by Joel Courtney. The real standout is Elle Fanning (as Alice Dainard), whose acting beyond her years is absolutely astonishing. She jumped out of the screen at me in an early scene of the group making the movie at a local train station. Her acting was so far beyond any expectation and anyone else in the film, that I had to watch the scene again. The other kids are funny, their main role. The adults are adequate, but not much more than that. They each convey the role they are supposed to be, but that’s all.The writing is a bit hit or miss, though here you get into matters of personal taste. I thought there was too much of a soap operatic backstory to the Lamb and Dainard families. Their connections may have looked great on paper but the whole thing was unnecessary and a bit too distracting. The military man in charge was too much of a stock villain without any clear motive for being so. It was much more interesting that in “E.T.” the seemingly sinister government people, in the end, were only trying to help.The special effects are good, though gratuitous at times and require the audience to suspend disbelief a few times too many. A heavy, speeding train would just smash right through a small pickup truck and keep going, but it sets up a big scene that’s wonderfully executed. Later on the CGI gets a bit much and takes over for the entire problematic finale. The finale, at least a quarter of the film, almost drops all pretense of reality (yes, it is a movie, but still...) and is the part that causes much of the negativity toward the film. One always has to give any film a certain amount of wild coincidences and improbable happenings, but here they really pile up. When the alien is shown, late in the film, it’s a bit too much of a monster and not enough of a sentient being for me. No effort at all was made to explain how the alien Rubik’s cube-like technology worked; just a hint would have been fine.Let’s get back to the beginning. This was a summer movie made for a mostly young audience to enjoy. It totally succeeds in that for me. Yes, the ending is not up to the rest of the film and feels grafted on. But it’s a good film with a great atmosphere, and most people should really enjoy it.

As a kid who grew up in the late 70's and 80's watching films like ET, Jaws and Close Encounters I was destined to enjoy this movie. For me to say that Super 8 is a nostalgic and entertaining movie would be true. To say that Super 8 is a J.J. Abrams tribute to Spielbergian cinema would be partly true. Partly. There are so many parallels to story, characters, time period and genre that's it near impossible not to immediately start making connections to which Spielberg film is being referenced in any particular scene.That said, before I get into Spielbergia I must give J.J. Abrams his due as an original artist. Anyone who has watched American television the past decade knows Abrams can deliver solidly on story and character with series like Alias, Lost and Fringe under his belt. However, until now his feature film career has been rooted in existing properties like Mission Impossible III and the new Star Trek. Both highly entertaining and visceral films in my opinion. But with Super 8 being his first original screenplay for a feature film, in some ways this was uncharted territory for Abrams. But with someone like Spielberg as his collaborator and producer and Abrams litany of experience in film-making and storytelling its hard to imagine his first original feature being anything but what we would come to expect from him. Emotional, well plotted, well acted, funny and just plain entertaining.Now that we've gotten that out of the way lets get to the fun part - the Spielberg parallels! Here's the ones I spotted, in no particular order:1. The "catalyst" into Act 2 is a spectacular train crash. Any coincidence that the 1st movie Spielberg remember's seeing as a child was 'The Greatest Show on Earth', which also contains one of the biggest train crashes in movie history? In fact, that train crash is said to be what inspired an 8 year Spielberg to shoot his first film; 2 toy trains crashing into each other (also as a way to get away with seeing his toy trains crash over and over without getting them taken away by his father.) Notice the discussion in Super 8 about filming the toy trains crashing into one another, which ultimately they do.2. The obvious MILITARY parallel of Alien Life in Close Encounters being covered up by a staged viral outbreak that kills anyone or thing that breathes it causing town evacuation. This VS. the Military coverup of Alien Life in Super 8 being a staged grass fire that causes town evacuation.3. In JAWS the scariest thing about the shark is the NOT seeing it. Same is true in Super 8, we don't fully see the monster until the film is almost finished. Builds suspense much more effectively.3. Any coincidence the place that that the Alien in Super 8 makes his final takeoff into space from a water "tower". In Close Encounters the Alien Mothership arrives and takes off from Devil's "Tower", Wyoming.4. The town hall meeting in Super 8 is very reminiscent of the town hall meeting in Close Encounters. All citizens EXCEPT the sheriff seem to be clueless and way off base about whats really going on.5. The sound that the Alien makes is VERY similar to the sound of the T-Rex in Jurassic Park (as well as the sound of the dying truck in Spielberg's 1st feature 'Duel'.)6. The main kid, Joe doesn't make good grades, as evidenced by him throwing his C+ papers aside when the Alice sees them (this could easily be a J.J. Abrams childhood connection too however.)7. In ET & CLOSE ENCOUNTERS the alien makes a "psychic" connection of some kind with the people it interacts with. In ET its Elliott "feeling" what ET feels (i.e. classroom scene with frogs & Elliott getting drunk & Elliott getting sick when ET gets sick, etc.) In Close Encounters its Richard Dreyfuss and Melinda Dillon being obsessed with the image of Devil's Tower, which ultimately draws them to it. In Super 8 every human the Alien touches "sees" what the alien feels and has been through, thus sympathizing with it.8. In ET a group of underdog kids led by Elliott "save the day" for ET. In THE GOONIES a group of underdog kids led by Mikey "save the day" for Mikey's families home which is about to be sold and bulldozed. Same here in Super 8 with Joe, the main kid taking one of the cubes which is close enough to the Water Tower to be drawn to it, thus creating a foundation for the Alien's ship to work from. Remember all the other cubes had been taken away by the government until the very end. And Joe is the one who tell the Alien to "GO" and that he understands and that bad things happen and its OK. This could be seen as the alien's motivation to leave. (my brother mentioned a parallel to 'Stand By Me' underdog kids, which is also true.)9. Slight Spielbergian cinematography connections - 2: a. The way both the gas station attendant and the airfare bus driver are "pulled away" feet first screaming by the Alien is very similar to the first death in Jurassic Park, where the gatekeeper is "pulled away" feet first screaming by the Velociraptor. b. The side tracking dolly shots of the kids running through neighborhood "up and over" hills, fences, etc is very similar to side tracking dolly shots in ET of kids riding their bikes through neighborhood "up and over" hills, fences, etc trying to get ET to the forrest.10. And here are a random sampling of other various connections I saw to Spielbergian cinema - the use of smoke and light, the conversational cadence of the kids interrupting each other & using cuss words poorly, loss of a parent, military being overly "big brother" in hiding alien, tracking and dolly shots, overhead shot of bus. I could go on and on.Without question Super 8 has a multitude of connections and parallels to Steven Spielberg films but it is also good to keep in mind that good story elements are good story elements no matter when, where or who they are used by. Many times the good ones pop up over and over again, precisely for that reason, because they work. Overlap to previous archetypes or story mythologies is inevitable because the ones we like are the ones we like, whether they are set in space or in the old west. Good storytellers are drawn to these same archetypal stories, they just flavor them differently each generation. In summation, all of these parallels could simply be a MASTER STUDENT (Abrams) following his MASTER TEACHER (Spielberg) with such skill that it comes off as an omage, which it very well may be and does not keep it from being a truly original work.BONUS!#. Not a Spielberg omage but the name of the gas station KELVIN is the 2nd reference J.J. Abrams has made to his grandfather in a feature film, the 1st being the name of one of the spaceships in Star Trek (the "U.S.S. Kelvin") And of course all LOST fans know Kelvin is the name of the guy that was in the Swan Hatch before Desmond.#. Also not a Spielberg parallel, but the kids zombie file "The Case" pays omega to George A. Romero, the godfather of zombie films by naming the chemical plant 'Romero Chemicals'. Loved that.

The movie is great but it's got decent grain if anyone likes it but it's great 4k transfer

Bientôt dix ans pour ce film – à noter d’ailleurs pour les amateurs de 4K qu’une nouvelle édition va paraître à l’occasion de ce 10ème anniversaire. La nostalgie / célébration des années 80 n’en finit plus de battre son plein, qui pour s’en tenir à un univers relativement proche a depuis pu culminer par exemple dans la série Stranger Things. En 2011, J.J. Abrams était non seulement le créateur de séries que l’on sait, mais aussi un producteur et réalisateur de cinéma déjà accompli, notamment pour son travail au sein de franchises comme Mission : Impossible et Star Trek. Rendre hommage à ce qu’on était adolescent et ce qui nous a formés, servir dans le même temps les « mauvais » genres que l’on aime tant : la formule n’est pas nouvelle, et comme toute formule elle trouve assez vite ses limites. Avec Super 8, même dans un cadre limité et même s’il ne développe pas franchement tout le potentiel de son point de départ, Abrams me paraît cependant avoir vraiment réussi son coup et signé un film éminemment sympathique.Le secret du succès : être honnête, bien sûr, ne pas s’engager dans une entreprise de récupération tous azimuts, et éviter ce qui abîme tant de films plus ou moins sur le même modèle. Il était donc capital de ne pas faire uniquement dans le festival de références d’une part, de ne pas perdre la part de candeur admirée dans les œuvres auxquelles on rend hommage en faisant constamment dans le clin d’œil et/ou le deuxième ou troisième degré. Bien sûr, c’est le genre de films conçus par des ‘geeks’ qui s’adressent au moins en partie à une communauté d’autres ‘geeks’ du même genre, en particulier ceux qui ont été jeunes à la même époque. Mais pas que, et pour cela on peut remercier Abrams, qui a véritablement cherché à rendre hommage mais aussi à créer une œuvre autonome susceptible de prendre le relais, aujourd’hui et pour une autre génération, de celles qui l’ont nourri lui et une partie de sa génération trois décennies auparavant. A n’en pas douter Super 8 aura de l’importance pour nombre de spectateurs qui l’auront découvert, enfant ou adolescent, dans les années 2010, et qui sait peut-être autant que les productions Spielberg en ont eu pour leurs aînés. Sa réussite se jugera finalement aussi à cette aune, mais je suis pour ma part assez peu inquiet.En ce qui me concerne, les parallèles avec E.T. (ou dans une moindre mesure Rencontres du troisième type) ne me gênent en aucun cas. Quant au côté Club des cinq – le filon creusé par d’autres productions Spielberg des années 80, à commencer évidemment par les Goonies (1985) – s’il n’a bien sûr rien d’original, il est ici traité avec assez de sens de l’à-propos et de fraîcheur pour ne pas être qu’une pure resucée. Nourri de ses propres souvenirs – le point commun avec Spielberg étant bien sûr qu’ils étaient tous deux des enfants ayant expérimenté très jeune en faisant leurs petits films de leur côté, en 8 mm pour l’aîné et en Super 8 pour le cadet – Super 8 trouve de fait un équilibre assez enviable entre le retour sur l’enfance de l’art et l’hommage aux genres toujours aimés (parfois un peu à la Joe Dante, mais avec moins de mauvais esprit et d’ironie même si lui aussi a pu se pencher sur eux également avec tendresse, comme dans Matinee / Panic à Florida Beach, 1993). Bien sûr, on peut préférer la candeur des modèles – et aussi une forme d’angoisse plus profonde, qui est sans doute pour beaucoup chez Spielberg pour faire ressortir d’autant plus la victoire du merveilleux – et on peut aimer justement un peu plus de mauvais esprit. En définitive, un spectateur comme moi préférera toujours un Joe Dante à un J.J. Abrams**, même si le deuxième, à l’âge numérique, peut réaliser des films plus immédiatement impressionnants que le premier. Je ne pense pas que la façon dont il a repris la franchise Star Wars, pour moi de façon trop servile et en montrant assez peu de personnalité, soit une très bonne nouvelle relativement à sa capacité à résister au formatage plus qu’à la marge. Mais pour ce qui est de la façon avec laquelle il a au préalable salué Steven Spielberg en suivant sur ses pas, je trouve pour ma part qu’il a mis le curseur là où il le fallait, précisément de façon assez autonome – mais cela est évidemment dû au fait qu’il pouvait créer son histoire de zéro, ce qui est plus difficile à faire dans les Star Wars – et sans trop faire le malin. Filmé sur pellicule avec quelques plans occasionnellement tournés en numérique (et évidemment avec de multiples plans filmés sur fond vert), remarquablement assisté par son chef opérateur Larry Fong, Abrams use et abuse du ‘flare’ et de l’effet « rayon bleu » que l’on trouve ici aussi bien dans les intérieurs qu’en extérieur (notamment dans la scène de l’accident, puis celle dans la chambre avec le projecteur)***. Un bon signe que les modèles sont des films des années 80 et 90, bien sûr, une volonté de retrouver un type de lumières et de caractéristiques visuelles qui étaient précisément ceux des films de Spielberg et de quelques autres, et sans doute une façon de pointer vers un ailleurs merveilleux, baigné de religiosité, qui identifie en partie ces films. Cet indice visuel suffit-il à en faire l’équivalent ? Sans doute pas, mais en cela comme en d’autres choses, Abrams retrouve tout de même quelque chose de ses modèles, en renouvelant la formule juste ce qu’il faut.La bande de gamins qu’il a trouvés est très bien, et il les a évidemment dirigés de façon à ce que l’écueil dont je parlais plus haut soit soigneusement évité. Il fallait ne pas trop tenir les spectateurs à distance tout en cherchant à se les mettre dans la poche, par les trop nombreux clins d’œil notamment, et pouvoir croire aux sentiments des personnages. De ce point de vue, comptent non seulement la façon dont Abrams a dirigé les jeunes acteurs mais aussi le casting lui-même, pas loin du coup de génie, en tout cas pour les deux acteurs principaux. On croit tout de suite à Joel Courtney en double à peine fantasmé d’Abrams et il incarne idéalement le mélange de candeur et de ‘geekerie’ qui définit ce type de personnage. Face à ce nouveau venu, une enfant de la balle qui à douze ans avait déjà une relativement longue carrière derrière elle et qui depuis l’a continuée, comme on le sait : Elle Fanning. Elle illuminait déjà de sa présence les quelques minutes où elle apparaissait dans le Benjamin Button de David Fincher (2008), et en l’espace d’un an elle jouait chez les Coppola fille et père (Somewhere ; Twixt) et dans Super 8. Elle y est remarquable, comme elle le sera, à plusieurs reprises et très différemment, lors de la suite de sa carrière dans les années 2010. S’il y a une actrice révélée enfant que l’on souhaite voir longtemps sur les écrans, c’est bien Elle !*Après avoir rédigé ce commentaire, j’ai jeté un coup d’œil aux Cahiers du cinéma de l’époque de la sortie du film (n°669, juillet-août 2011), qui lui avaient consacré un dossier relativement épais. J’avais oublié que Stéphane Delorme avait écrit un article précisément intitulé « Le Rayon bleu ». J’ai décidé de conserver tel quel mon titre, mais je voulais tout de même rendre à César ce qui lui appartient.**Et, dans un autre ordre d’idées, ou en tout cas sur des mode et ton assez différents, ma préférence irait assez nettement au plus subtil et mystérieux Midnight Special de Jeff Nichols (2016). Lui aussi enfant de Steven Spielberg (et de John Carpenter, entre autres), Nichols est adepte d’un cinéma de genre empruntant moins de passages obligés, moins explicatif et plus elliptique, plus métaphorique aussi – moins évidemment grand public donc, même s’il ne cherche en aucun cas à laisser le public sur le bord de la route. S’il me fallait choisir c’est bien ce film-là qui aurait mes faveurs en priorité, mais comme rien ne me force à choisir...***Dans le commentaire audio, Abrams explique qu’il a un goût immodéré pour les ‘lens flares’, qui n’est apparemment pas complètement partagé par son chef opérateur. Etant donné le nombre considérable de tels ‘flares’ que l’on peut repérer dans Super 8, on voit qui esthétiquement a eu le dernier mot.EDITION FRANCAISE STEELBOOK DVD + BLU-RAY PARAMOUNT (2011)Il existe déjà n éditions de ce film, aussi bien en dvd qu’en blu-ray. A ceux qui n’ont rien et voudraient en acquérir une de voir s’ils comptent attendre fin mai 2021 pour acquérir l’édition du 10ème anniversaire (avec un blu-ray 4K UHD en plus du blu-ray, donc). Aucun problème pour le blu-ray existant en tout cas, aussi bien pour les langues proposées (pour le film autant que pour les suppléments) que pour la qualité du master. L’image est parfaitement définie, sans pour autant trahir les grands choix photographiques. La musique et les effets sonores sont restitués de façon assez équilibrée.Les suppléments raviront les fans du film. La bonne heure et demie que dure le making-of couvre à peu près tout le terrain, du projet d’Abrams au rôle des collaborateurs de création (le chef opérateur Larry Fong, le musicien Michael Giacchino), du producteur (Steven Spielberg lui-même) et de responsables des effets spéciaux, en passant évidemment par le casting des jeunes acteurs et les scènes de tournage sur le mode « on est tous devenus bien potes pendant le tournage ». Le commentaire audio réunit Abrams et Fong, et s’avère modérément pertinent même s’il contient tout de même quelques anecdotes bonnes à prendre. Il y a à peu près 13’ de scènes coupées, ou plus exactement environ une moitié de scènes coupées et une autre moitié de scènes alternatives, généralement un peu plus longues. Le tout forme un ensemble qui n’a rien de fracassant mais assez copieux et plutôt plaisant.

A great movie which is a rollercoaster of an adventure which combines other movies like ET, The Goonies, Close Encounters etc. If you like Spielberg and JJ movies you will enjoy this. It has all of the hallmarks of a classic despite getting very average reviews.

What a splendid film, Elle Fanning is a star in waiting.

A Five Star movie. Absolutely - however I will be the first to acknowledge that this has it's own unique niche audience, and won't be for everyone. This is a love letter to the movies of the late 70's and 80's, the movie of Zemeckis, Dante and yes, most of all Spielberg. For in this feature J.J. Abrams has created a love letter to Spielberg's era of moviemaking, a movie that both celebrates and emulates the styles and tools, the moviemaking grammar, and particularly the tone of movies from that era.It's all that, but still wrapped in a story, one that has a set of familiar elements, but wrapped up in a new enough arrangement. A bunch of kids in 1979 bond while making home movies with their Super 8 camera. They are filming one night when they witness a terrible train crash.. but when the dust settles, there is something from the cargo of the train that has been released, and it is about to have a major impact on the town. Scratch beneath that relatively simple skin though, and you'll find elements of the Goonies (bunch of kids coming of age through shared adventure), Close Encounters (paranoia, alien contact affecting ordinary small town folk), Gremlins (the black humour), and E.T. (adolescents coming of age in damaged families). And if this is an homage to Spielberg, then it's earlier Spielberg - the guns, deaths and occasional mild swear words aren't airbrushed out. It is very much a story first and foremost about real kids, living real lifes, and much less about the fantastic events happening around them. Yes there is spectacle towards the end, but only as a pay off to the emotional journey of the characters.. if it's just the action or effects you want, you will likely be disappointed. In fact, if there is any off note in the movie, it is the appearance of cgi - a very modern tool to tell an old fashioned story, and taking you out of the nostalgia trip somewhat. But it's not enough to derail the journey.It's not just the director; the look, the feel of the movie, down through sets, period detail and even the musical score, also celebrate that early 80's feel. And let's not forget those lead roles - kids who actually come across as real, likeable, believable - the scenes where they have to emote, particularly Elle Fanning, are amazingly genuine, and the relationship between the leads is handled in a delicate way which uses visuals and acting more than it does clunky exposition or awkward dialogue.So yes, it is my own personal 5 stars.. Maybe it's too nostalgic to appeal to today's kids, maybe its too much about kids to appeal to today's adults. But for me, I am just at that age that when I was young and impressionable it was Spielberg and Dante and the rest that stirred my own passion for movies, that made that first mark, that created those moments that would be my first love of cinema.. and it is precisely that feeling that has been captured and celebrated here. This is what happens when movies about kids are made by mature filmmakers. Watching it, I felt like that young wide eyed kid in the cinema again, and it was a glorious feeling.