The Best Thing About 'Super 8' Is the Super 8

It's filmmaking 101, and like Charles' zombie movie, Super 8, produced by Steven Spielberg and directed by J.J. Abrams, is rather wonderfully basic. At first, anyway.

Super 8

Director: J.J. Abrams
Cast: Kyle Chandler, Elle Fanning, Joel Courtney, Gabriel Basso, Noah Emmerich, Ron Eldard, Riley Griffiths, Ryan Lee, Zach Mills, Glynn Turman
Rated: PG-13
Studio: Amblin Entertainment, Bad Robot
Year: 2011
US date: 2011-06-10 (General release)
UK date: 2011-08-05 (General release)

Come a little closer huh, ah will ya huh.

Close enough to look in my eyes, Sharona.

-- The Knack, "My Sharona"

The best thing about Super 8 is the Super 8. Fourteen-year-old Joe (Joel Courtney) is helping his best friend Charles (Riley Griffiths) make a movie, a zombie picture where the actors lurch and stagger, spurt blood from their mouths when they slam their heads against nails on a wall. The Super 8 look of these scenes is terrific, grainy and blocky, ambitious and familiar.

Charles' story has a detective, played by the boys' tallest classmate, Martin (Gabriel Basso), in a bad suit and glasses, and a few explosives effects, engineered by their firebuggy friend Cary (Ryan Lee). Joe's on makeup (asked how he's come up with the look of zombie skin, he elucidates the dry brush technique, for which he uses Euro Gray: "Oh my God, there's like 14 different grays, it's crazy"). Each day the crew heads out to shoot, determined to make a film contest deadline. When Charles makes a change, Joey's reluctant. "I just don’t understand why the wife makes it a story," he complains. Charles explains that this helps the audience care what happens to him: "It matters because she loves him."

It's filmmaking 101, and like Charles' zombie movie, Super 8, produced by Steven Spielberg and directed by J.J. Abrams, is rather wonderfully basic. Clever and well-made basic, celebratory and self-aware basic, but basic nonetheless. So, when the boys bring in Alice (Elle Fanning) to play the wife, everything changes. Not only does she borrow her dad's Skylark to drive them to the train station to shoot, but she's also an astoundingly good actor: as she pleads with her husband not to go after the zombies, to stay with her instead, her cheeks seem even paler than before, and eyes begin to well up. The boys watching her are utterly transfixed, and so are you.

So far, so excellent. In this assortment of kids, Super 8 shows a reverence for detail. It's 1979, Walter Cronkite's talking about Three Mile Island and the boys ride their bikes everywhere, even to cross the street, and eat Twizzlers. Joe papers his bedroom walls with posters ("Keep on truckin'") and builds model trains and classic movie monsters (the hunchback of Notre Dame, Romero's zombies). His mom has died recently in an accident at the steel mill, leaving his dad Jack (Kyle Chandler), bereft, immersing himself in his work as a deputy. He thinks Joe should go to baseball camp, away. "It'd be good for you to spend some time with some kids who don’t run around with cameras and monster makeup," he murmurs, looking off screen as Joe's face falls. In turn, Joe's been spending his time on the movie and at Charles' house, surrounded by siblings and couple of amiable parents ("You always have a place here," assures Charles' dad). Joe is completely smitten by Alice. And watching her with him, through the Super 8 frame, you know exactly why.

Then comes the monster, at once the major metaphor and problem of Super 8. It first appears while the kids are making that magical scene at the train station. Thrilled to see a train headed their way ("Production values!" announces Charles), they scurry to set up and shoot, with Joe on the boom mic and Alice needing to yell out her lines over the train's ruckus. Distracted for a moment, Joe sees the accident that will change everything: the train collides with a white pickup truck, derails, and explodes, car by car. The sequence is thrilling, the cuts both efficient and dreamy, the frames perfectly askew, the children panicked and rushing amid flying debris and flames, but also amazed to be part of a real and fabulously movie-like disaster.

As they pull themselves together -- and recover the camera that continued to roll even as it laid on its side, where it was dropped amid the chaos -- the kids must run away from a slew of soldiers, suddenly arrived on scene. Before you can say E.T., the film is transformed. First it's a science fiction story, where the armed adults -- led by the prototypically insidious Colonel Nelec (Noah Emmerich) -- are trying to get at what the kids know and also keep hidden from them and everyone else in town the secret alien that was on and escaped from that train. And second, it's a story about fractured families, healed by their encounters and near misses with the alien, primarily, Joe and Jack, and also, Alice and her dad, local "loser" Louis (Ron Eldard).

Neither of these stories works as well as the kids' own, that is, the making of their movie. In their efforts to sort out what's happening to them, the losses they endure and the desires they feel, they find both poetry and a revealing mirror in their work. That so much of their experience is recorded on film -- on their own Super 8 footage -- makes it both fragile and fixed, a source of clues to what's happening they might watch again and again, as well as a weird, inaccurate reflection of their internal lives. On top of the boys' Super 8 footage is another lost-and-recovered reel, found among the belongings of a science teacher, Dr. Woodward (Glynn Turman), also mixed up in the secret and a target of Nelec's peculiar vengeance. As the boys watch this old-timey black and white imagery, they're unable to suss out what it means, exactly, but they know it means something, as all movies do.

As they gaze and consult, interpret and marvel, the kids who watch movies in this movie serve as your surrogates as much as objects of your own gazing and interpreting. Until Super 8 turns to its more pedestrian plot business, the aliens and the action, you're looking closely with the kids, hoping to share what they might understand.


The year in song reflected the state of the world around us. Here are the 70 songs that spoke to us this year.

70. The Horrors - "Machine"

On their fifth album V, the Horrors expand on the bright, psychedelic territory they explored with Luminous, anchoring the ten new tracks with retro synths and guitar fuzz freakouts. "Machine" is the delicious outlier and the most vitriolic cut on the record, with Faris Badwan belting out accusations to the song's subject, who may even be us. The concept of alienation is nothing new, but here the Brits incorporate a beautiful metaphor of an insect trapped in amber as an illustration of the human caught within modernity. Whether our trappings are technological, psychological, or something else entirely makes the statement all the more chilling. - Tristan Kneschke

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.