Jump to content


Photo

JJ Abrams 'Super 8'


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Jim Carlile

Jim Carlile
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 22 February 2011 - 03:31 AM

I'm surprised there hasn't been more discussion about this 'top-secret' Spielberg production. Apparently they are keeping the original title:

http://www.aceshowbi...w/00034931.html

http://filmworkshops...-8-days-part-1/
  • 0

#2 Carl Looper

Carl Looper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1425 posts
  • Digital Image Technician
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 23 February 2011 - 01:11 AM

I'm surprised there hasn't been more discussion about this 'top-secret' Spielberg production. Apparently they are keeping the original title:

http://www.aceshowbi...w/00034931.html

http://filmworkshops...-8-days-part-1/


Discussing something that doesn't yet exist is somewhat difficult.

I imagine discussion will eventually occur once the film is released.

It will be interesting to see how Speilberg/Abbrams frame Super8. What role does Super8 play in the film, given the title and it's focus in the teasers?

But apart from speculation, which just feeds into the film's promotional strategy, what else can one discuss? The teasers? The snippets of information? The manufacturing of an ausdience? The construction of anticipation. Speilbergian messianism - the audience, as moths, awesome-struck by the light of that which has yet to come, and in the context of everyday life no less.

Carl
  • 0

#3 Matt Stevens

Matt Stevens
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 705 posts
  • Other

Posted 25 February 2011 - 10:12 AM

At least one character, a young boy, record some of the events on their super8 camera. Beyond that no one has a clue.
  • 0

#4 Carl Looper

Carl Looper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1425 posts
  • Digital Image Technician
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 03 March 2011 - 10:32 PM

Here's a flash frame from the evolving viral for Super8 the movie.
Why does this frame not show Super8 sprocket holes?

Posted Image

Probably because the filmmakers don't care.

And if so, why should we do otherwise?

Carl
  • 0

#5 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7371 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 03 March 2011 - 10:50 PM

I doubt many intended viewers will know/care....It's marketing; all lies!
  • 0

#6 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3323 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 06 March 2011 - 09:39 PM

I found the use of one of the most mundane, box like super-8 cameras ever made off putting. Ok, I think Kodak camera has a somewhat cool grip on it, but the camera itself is nothing to look at. Why not use a Canon 814-XLS with all the cool gizmo's and gadgets on it. Why not use a Eumig 881 with the silver body and the time-exposure / electric eye sensor feature to grab some really unusual frames.

The film could have generated some more excitement by having the kids oogling a super-8 filmmaker magazine and foaming over the elite cameras. Instead, the super-8 camera can't be a co-star. It's just so typical of Hollywood to feel threatened by super-8 cameras to the point where they have to use an absolutely boring camera for the movie.
  • 0

#7 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7371 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 06 March 2011 - 11:20 PM

Might've been a choice to keep it Americana, as I take it this is happening in the "heartland." Though, honestly, I don't think the camera, nor the "8mm" footage will factor too highly in the story, that's just me, though.
  • 0

#8 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3323 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 07 March 2011 - 02:00 AM

Might've been a choice to keep it Americana, as I take it this is happening in the "heartland." Though, honestly, I don't think the camera, nor the "8mm" footage will factor too highly in the story, that's just me, though.


I think that is well put, but then this begs the question, why even call it Super-8?
  • 0

#9 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7371 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 07 March 2011 - 07:30 AM

Well it's better than "home movie" ;)
  • 0

#10 Chris Burke

Chris Burke
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1720 posts
  • Boston, MA

Posted 07 March 2011 - 09:11 AM

let us all hope that JJ is running some brilliant misinformation campaign that has influenced this thread. Since it has been called top secret as much as Super 8, I think that there is still hope for it. It is really no big deal to shoot super 8 and do a 2k scan if you are JJ Abrams, so there is little excuse not to. He really rallied for and got to use anamorphic 35 for Star Trek, so I can't really see any producer questioning his camera format choices. Hell, he'll probably shoot a 65mm picture in his day, he's got cache.
  • 0

#11 Matt Stevens

Matt Stevens
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 705 posts
  • Other

Posted 07 March 2011 - 01:17 PM

I've zero problem with anything done with this thing so far. It's just a movie, after all. Not a bio or historical epic. It's going to be a monster or alien film that happens to have some kid capturing some footage on his 8mm camera. Don't expect the camera or the look of the footage to be 100% real. It's just Hollywood.
  • 0

#12 Anthony Schilling

Anthony Schilling
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1063 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR

Posted 07 March 2011 - 10:20 PM

Spielberg started with Super 8 and I think that in this film he will pay some homage. I read somewhere that he had an original script about kids making movies with Super 8, then he decided to incorporate that story into this alien flick... so there may very well be some prominence to the format in this movie. I think the film will inform a lot of people as to what Super 8 is, who formerly did not know. What probably won't happen... a great opportunity for Kodak to insert some kind of trailer add that simply states "Super 8 is still here". we should start writing them.
  • 0

#13 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3323 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 08 March 2011 - 03:35 AM

I've zero problem with anything done with this thing so far. It's just a movie, after all. Not a bio or historical epic. It's going to be a monster or alien film that happens to have some kid capturing some footage on his 8mm camera. Don't expect the camera or the look of the footage to be 100% real. It's just Hollywood.


lol, it's probably Spielberg's actual camera that he used 40 years ago. However, I think they could have connected with kids nowadays by showing that even back in 1979, there were very cool looking cameras that helped make cool looking things specifically because they offered faster lenses and slower shutter times to capture images at night.

The promo I saw happened at night. It just seems like a lost opportunity to not go with a cooler camera.
  • 0


rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

Aerial Filmworks

Wooden Camera

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

CineLab

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

CineTape

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

CineTape

Glidecam