Super 8 Does Not Deserve the Hype

Note: If you're looking for an interpretation, you won't find one here.  This movie is really pretty straightforward and you shouldn't have any trouble following the storyline if you watch it.  The below contains a review and small analysis of the movie.

Review:
Yesterday, I caught myself watching the highly acclaimed "Super 8" directed by J.J. Abrams and co-produced by Steven Spielberg.  It hit number one at the box office over the weekend, so I was excited for a thrilling movie.  I wasn't looking for anything deep, like "Black Swan."  I expected a movie that would keep me entertained.  Unfortunately, it looked like a movie crafted by a very young Michael Bay, with lots of guns and pretty explosions.

The movie follows a cute gang of middle-schoolers looking to shoot a short film for the Super 8 contest.  During one of their late-night shootings, they witness a train derailment and all chaos ensues.  They continue to shoot the film even though the small town of Lillian is quickly being destroyed.  There is a monster, the Air Force, and cute love story entangled together in this movie.

All of that being said, the movie wasn't terrible.  The grudge I have with it is that the title is rather misleading and unimportant.  But before I get to that, the good stuff is worth mentioning.

In some ways, this movie was a hit because it was so personal.  The movie takes place in the late seventies/early eighties, so the audience is clearly for the middle-aged.  "Super 8" refers to the type of film camera used during that time period, and the Super 8 Film Festival was a competition for indie movie directors at the time.  J.J. Abrams entered in this competition himself when he was younger, and it was his entry which caught Spielberg's attention in the earlier days.

As for the movie itself, the cast of fresh actors is remarkably good, and for the budget of around $50 million, this is certainly a good flick.

Now for the bad stuff...

The first issue I have with the movie is the title.  In an interview, it was stated that,

"The fact that the title is not a known thing is probably a sign that we're used to being pre-sold. I'm hoping that people see it, like it, and the title becomes what the title is. Certainly films like 'District 9' and 'Inception' had titles that didn't quite make sense but once they became known, people went, 'Oh yeah.'"

 The difference between "Super 8" and the two films he mentions is that "District 9" was about District 9, and "Inception" was about inception.  "Super 8" is NOT about the film.  In fact, the whole notion of the film reel with the rest of the movie seems completely out of place.  The only connection between the two is the accidental recording of the monster during the train crash.  Although it's important, it plays a small role in the movie since the reel is kept hidden for most of the movie.  And once it's presented to the Deputy, it's never seen again.

Seeing as the title really had nothing to do with the core of the movie, it almost makes it seem like there were two separate stories here.  The Super 8 film was definitely a look into Abrams' life, but it almost seems like the rest of the movie is more important.  It is the monster which brings together more elements of life and society, friendship and trust.

This movie would be especially confusing for viewers if they didn't know what a Super 8 was.  Holistically, the movie was quite watchable, but certain elements of the film handicap it, and the attention it's getting isn't really worthy of the quality.  Nevertheless, do watch it, but don't expect anything eye popping.

Analysis:
The movie had its moments, and there were nice elements that made it deeper.

1. The movie has a sense of "E.T." (which, interestingly enough, was directed by Spielberg).  "Super 8" contains a monster which people inherently assume is bad.
2. The concept of self-fulfilling prophecy is seen clearly in this movie.  Because humans inherently assume the monster to be destructive, they harm it.  In turn, the monster fights back, thus creating the notion of violence.
3. The movie says a word about innocence.  The monster is constantly "collecting" people until he meets Joe.  They converse, and all of a sudden, there is a shift in attitude.  Among the chaos, it is the pure heart that overcomes the destruction.
4. This next one is a bit tricky.  There is a parallel between the movie "Super 8" and the mini film the kids are creating.  Charles, the child director, adds in a love story between the detective and his wife in order to make his film more interesting.  It seems like Alice was the "wife" in Charles' movie, but in real life.  Alice falls in love with Joe, the hero of the disjointed movie.  It seems like this relationship is the only one that has a beginning and continuation in the entire movie.
5. It was mentioned in an interview that the allusion to the Hunchback of Notre Dame was an intentional look onto the story of "Super 8."  The monster in this movie is comparable to the Hunchback in that people are afraid of what they do not know.
6. The last scene with the water tower imploding is a cliché ending.  Many movies end with a rainy nighttime to show a change in characters.  This movie was no different.  The water rained over the kids, their parents, and the Air Force.  It was remarkably powerful, because it suggested that the world is really a pretty big society.  Lillian may be relatively unrelated to the Air Force, but guess what, they were all fighting for the same cause.  The water brought peace to the town, and it welded the people together.

If you want to read up on the interviews, they're here:

http://www.flicksandbits.com/2011/06/09/j-j-abrams-interview-for-super-8/12485/

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110609/film_nm/us_jjabrams

Final Rating: B+

Thanks for reading,

cyoubx

Here's An Interpretation of Black Swan's Nina.

Hey all,

Here's a slopshodder interpretation of the movie Black Swan.  There's so much going through my brain right now that I'm having trouble comprehending this movie.  Thus, below is an array of thoughts I need to lay out on the computer screen.  I'm assuming you've seen the movie and won't be hurt as I discuss pieces from the whole movie.  I'm not going to give a plot summary because it's not that important.  I'm literally going to just discuss the psychotic nature of Nina.

So, first a diagnosis to further this interpretation/psychoanalysis of Nina.

I've read on some interpretations that Nina is purely psychotic, and not schizophrenic.  I disagree.  Schizophrenia is a psychotic disorder, so it makes sense that Nina could be schizophrenic.  She exhibits all of the common symptoms of the disorder, including social withdrawal, delusions, bizarre behavior, and loss of contact with reality.

Her mother is definitely a contributing factor towards Nina's condition - Nina's mother is almost undoubtedly sexually abusive towards her, and it's fairly apparent that this started a long time ago when Nina was still young.  Nina's room is decorated with stuffed animals, and has pink decor.  Furthermore, the mother constantly suggests Nina to take her clothes off...to check the scratching, of course (ahem).

There is also something eerie about the scene where Nina "feels" herself only to later find out her mother is sleeping on a chair beside her.  The scene is brief but creepy.  I can't help but think that the mother was not sleeping at all, merely pretending to sleep as to spy on her daughter.

Now that the precedence for the mother and Nina's condition is set, I will proceed to the more compelling portion of this interpretation - who's real?  Who's just imagination?

I'm going to assert that the mother is fake.  Why?  Because there are unsettling things about the character that can't be explained.  The most obvious is when Lily comes over; the mother quickly closes the door without asking who it is.  However, there are other subtle hints.  When Nina closes the door on her mother's hand, the fingers are almost invariably injured.  This is shown on Nina when she wakes up the next morning with mittens over her hands.  Also, Nina wakes up later than usual to find that her mother did not wake her up.  Why?  Well, Nina did take hallucinogens the night before, and perhaps that altered her delusions.  There is another subtle hint.  Nina's mother's room is extremely sketchy.  It's never clear if those drawings on the wall are of Nina or someone else.  Thus, I make the claim that those paintings are actually of Nina's mother drawn by Nina herself.  It creates a sense that maybe her mother is still with her.  They're also not positive images, possibly suggesting the fact that they had a rough relationship in the past.  Finally, we never find out why Nina's mother is crying - is it because of her failure as a ballerina or something more?

Lily is for sure real.  The fact that the other characters interact with her is a testament of that.  The scene where Lily and Nina have sexual relations is actually key in my opinion.  There was definitely a change in that part of the movie.  Lily is very clearly a character foil for Nina.  They are polar opposites.  Lily is what Nina wants to become.  In the scene where they have sex, it's unclear whether or not it actually happened, but it shows something nevertheless.  At one point in the scene, Lily's face transforms into that of Nina's.  This is a clear representation of what is going through Nina's mind.  Nina has tried to masturbate twice before, and perhaps the third time really is the charm.  The fact that Nina imagined her own face on Lily is a testament of how Nina strongly feels like she needs to accomplish Thomas' "homework."  From that point onward, it becomes unclear whether or not the Lily's in the scenes are real or fake.  The fact that this transformation takes place explains why Nina didn't really stab Lily in the changing room, but really just injured herself.

This interpretation isn't really that compelling, but it helps me get some stuff down in writing.  I hope you enjoyed it, anyway.

Thanks for reading,
cyoubx