http://www.entertainmentearth.com/cjdoorway.asp?url=aff-home.asp

UDPATED: First 2 Clips From JJ Abrams Super 8

Paramount has just released the first full clip from Star Trek director JJ Abrams new movie  Super 8. Take a trip back to the late 70s to watch the train crash that starts the mystery at the heart of the movie. Oh yes, and there are lots of lens flares. [UPDATE: 2nd clip added] 

 

UPDATED: Classic Spielberg + Lens Flares + The Cars = 1st clips from Super 8

Helped along by the The Cars and their 1978 hit "Bye Bye Love," this clip (via Moviefone) from JJ Abrams’ Super 8 really shows off how this film is an homage to the Steven Spielberg films of that era. 

UPDATE: second clip picks up where the first left off.

Super 8 comes out June 10th. And after that, JJ Abrams promises he will turn his attention to that Star Trek sequel everyone is talking about.

Related:

 

 

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Red Dead Ryan
May 16, 2011 5:44 pm

Cool! Can’t wait to see this. Looks like yet another J.J Abrams classic!

And I wonder if there will be some sort of cross-promotion with the Super 8 motel chain?

CmdrR
May 16, 2011 5:50 pm

Could be good. Very Goonies-esque. Could use a good Devil In The Dark monster movie this summer, before the real brain death begins.

Drij
May 16, 2011 6:07 pm

huh a pickup derails a train? lame. JJ needs to stop with the Lens Flares…

Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire
May 16, 2011 6:13 pm

Can’t wait to see this. Looks to be great.
Seen Thor last night. great Movie as well.

davidfuchs
May 16, 2011 6:16 pm

EXECUTOR: YOU REQUIRE MORE LENS FLARES!

If other nerds get the above, you just get it :P

Ensign RedShirt
May 16, 2011 6:17 pm

I’ll be curious to see how this ends up being an homage, because the shooting and cutting style are nothing like 70’s Spielberg.

Bhek
May 16, 2011 6:20 pm

J J Drunk need to stop pretending to be a Director

trekker 5
May 16, 2011 6:45 pm

I so can not wait for this! I don’t think JJ will let me down,(on this movie or on Trek 12!)

Tim
May 16, 2011 6:47 pm

I agree with post 3. As soon as I saw that style you lost me.

MJ (carnation peanut)
May 16, 2011 7:10 pm

@7. Bhek Drunk need to stop pretending to know how to write a sentence.

MJ (carnation peanut)
May 16, 2011 7:14 pm

For all you self-appointed “train crash experts,” here are two examples of pickup trucks derailing trains:

http://www.scnews.com/news/2010-02-02/Front_Page/Driverless_truck_strikes_derails_train.html

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/07/17/amtrak-train-collides-with-truck-derails/

May 16, 2011 7:48 pm

Gotta say, clip looks amazing. I like the youthful Spielbergian feel, and yes, I like the lens flares just fine. That’s part of JJs style, and it’s nothing to complain about as far as I’m concerned.

Really looking forward to this one.

James Cude
May 16, 2011 8:05 pm

Hmm- I was a bit more into this from the previous trailer. This clip is a weird edit that doesn’t do any favors to the movie. And yes- JJ no offense but lens flares do not ‘direction’ make.

Daoud
May 16, 2011 8:12 pm

Wow, what is it with all the jj-o-pathy tonight?

Steven
May 16, 2011 8:16 pm

It’s sad when you read the constant postings of people who want JJ Abrams to lose the lens flares, such as #3

That’s like saying to: “Picasso – less mangled images of people.” or “Mozart, less musical notes.” Or Ansel Adams – “That’s good – but how about shooting the photo in color this time….”

We have to allow creative people the freedom of expression. Abrams is not a filmmaker waiter, waiting to take your orders on how a film or TV project is produced and should look: it’s not a democratic endeavor. It’s his image imprinted upon each work. To tell him or any creative person to alter their vision is rude. It’s basically telling someone how to exist and live. Imagine someone doing the same to you.

Red Dead Ryan
May 16, 2011 8:24 pm

I see a bunch of J.J haters here. They also go by the initials J.J, but unlike J.J Abrams, their initials don’t stand for Jefferey Jacob but instead represent “Jealous Jerk(s)”!

MJ (carnation peanut)
May 16, 2011 8:29 pm

@16

Jumping Jehoshaphat,

I completely agree with you!

It is a full moon tonight and the JJ haters are out in force!

May 16, 2011 8:47 pm

The trailer makes me feel like I missed this really cool movie that came out sometime between Star Wars and Close Encounters, and now I’m getting a chance to see it!

MJ (carnation peanut)
May 16, 2011 8:59 pm

@18. Do not see the resemblance to Donner’s “Superman,” so I assume you are referring to “Capricorn One”?

May 16, 2011 9:11 pm

@19: No. Not a real movie, but a movie I missed from that era with the same flavor.

Rusty0918
May 16, 2011 9:14 pm

#15

You’re right. The only reason why I’ve had this whole “lens flare” crud rubbed in was because of all those hard-hitting nitpickers.

I don’t care if he puts in lens flares, just not too many of them.

MJ (carnation peanut)
May 16, 2011 10:18 pm

@20. DM, you did not get my joke. Both those movies came out in 1978, i.e. in between Star Wars (77) and Close Encounters (79). :-))

May 17, 2011 12:19 am

for more movie trailers please check http://www.wally.tv/videos
there you can not only watch newest movie trailers like Kungfu Panda2 and x-man but also many hilarious viral videos.

trekker 5
May 17, 2011 2:45 am

#16 & #17 thats for sure!

anon
May 17, 2011 2:57 am

Thor made me think Kenneth Branagh would be a pretty good director for a Star Trek film, since it balanced action and dialogue very well . . .

naysaynever
May 17, 2011 4:24 am

here’s my two pence..jj abrams is a good director, and super 8 is going to be good fun, and thats a fact, who cares what the nitpickers say, i know i’ll enjoy it :)

captain_neill
May 17, 2011 4:35 am

Despite not being JJ Abrams’ biggest fan I can honestly say that I really do think this looks to be a really cool movie and I think it will be a good.

The concept looks interesting.

I did notice a few lens flares floating about in the trailer. LOL.

Paul B.
May 17, 2011 4:37 am

Seriously, the lens flares are a MAJOR issue. Many of us were taught to use cameras in such a way as to avoid flares; it’s not movie science, it’s just basic camera technique.

Flares take away from the experience because they remind the viewer that they are watching through a lens. Yes, we all KNOW we’re watching a movie, but when the camera draws attention to itself, it draws attention away from the story and characters.

I’ve never had a conversation where someone get completely washed out of my vision by a flare, yet that happens frequently in Star Trek ’09. It’s an added bit on unreality that ruins the ability to suspend disbelief.

It’s not nitpicking: Lens flares = reminder of camera’s presence = takes you out of the experience.

If Abrams would drop the lens flares, most of us wouldn’t have anything to complain about in his directing style.

captain_neill
May 17, 2011 4:37 am

Please don’t take the lens flares comment as another bitchy comment, I was only saying it as a joke.

That One Guy
May 17, 2011 4:43 am

A Spielberg/Abrams film?

Hmm…. you have my attention.

captain_neill
May 17, 2011 4:47 am

28

Interesting point about the lens flares, another point that I find about lens flares that I am commenting on as a film student and director is that a lens flare can sometimes ruin a good shot.

There was a scene of Spock in the new movie that I felt was a great shot and I felt a lens flare washing over his face did ruin it a little.

While the shakey camera in documnetary style is not my prefered shooting style I still like it in places. I do think that handheld cameras work great in scenes to invoke tension in an intense moment or in a fight sequence..

I say this as a film maker, not as a ranter so please don’t say anything in that regard.

May 17, 2011 4:54 am

A pickup truck that can barely stay on the ground derails a freight train that weighs TONS. The Blue Thunder, the limo with James Caan and Doc Brown’s time traveling Deloreon couldn’t derail a train!

Blake Powers
May 17, 2011 6:19 am

# 12 agreed

Simon
May 17, 2011 7:48 am

#28 – The fact I’m sitting in a movie theater with a bunch of strangers remind me I’m watching a movie projected through a lens.

Do you complain about “sound in space”?

“Close Encounters” had lens flares. So did “Saving Private Ryan”. I don’t remember people calling Spielberg out on those.

It’s a style. Period. And Abrams’ been more successful than anyone here. He doesn’t see it as broken, and if it ain’t broke: don’t fix it.

May 17, 2011 8:12 am

Lens flares wouldn’t have been such a mess if they didn’t try to eat actors faces all the time, and succeed.

cdp
May 17, 2011 9:04 am

I love JJs style and the lens flares don’t bother me at all as long as they are not overdone. I believe JJ Abrams himself admitted at one time that he might have overdone the lens flares a little bit in Star Trek so I think he learned from is mistake and will be a little bite more careful about it in the next Star Trek movie.

Red Dead Ryan
May 17, 2011 9:29 am

Here’s what J.J Abrams should do. He should start releasing two versions of his movies on dvd/Blu Ray. One with lens flares and one without. On the blu ray, you should be able to toggle the lens flares on or off. I guess for the dvd you’d need an extra disc for the lens flareless version of whatever J.J movie you’re watching.

At least you’d shut up half the haters……maybe….hopefully….I don’t know……I tried……sigh………oh well……….

32.
….

What are you rambling on about now?

John from Cincinnati
May 17, 2011 9:51 am

That’s not the full trailer!

The full trailer was in front of Thor when I saw it last weekend. It had much much much much much much much much much more and the movie looks great!

Bobby
May 17, 2011 9:56 am

#38 – More … lens flares?

;)

P Technobabble
May 17, 2011 10:10 am

It’s to be expected, I suppose, that any successful director is gonna be criticized by others, especially others who are not successful directors. Even Kubrick, considered by many to be one of the greatest directors of all time, was criticized… but I’m not sure how many of those critics were amongst the list of “greatest directors of all time.”

Personally, I have no issue with the lens flares. And I agree, they are a part of Abrams’ style. I would guess Abrams has his own reasons for them, and feels they are right for his own work.

Does anyone think moviegoers, in general, won’t go to one of his movies because of lens flares? I doubt that.

I think it’s ok to get off his back about lens flares now…

Phil
May 17, 2011 10:47 am

15. Steven – May 16, 2011

Well said…

cristo
May 17, 2011 11:34 am

Just need to say that the finale of Smallville sucked donkey b@ll5. It was so bad that it made TATV look like a true valentine to the fans.

Super 8 looks great. Did anybody catch the trek reference at :18?

Peace

sean
May 17, 2011 11:49 am

A train won’t always derail from an obstacle in the tracks, but it certainly can. Doesn’t matter if it’s a pickup or a Gremlin. Whether it would derail in such spectacular style is probably up for debate.

MJ (lilac cashew)
May 17, 2011 12:52 pm

@32 “A pickup truck that can barely stay on the ground derails a freight train that weighs TONS. The Blue Thunder, the limo with James Caan and Doc Brown’s time traveling Deloreon couldn’t derail a train!”

Hey Einstein, did you even bother to read my earlier post on this? Since you apparently are limited in what you can absorb, I’ll repeat it again for you here:

>>>> For all you self-appointed “train crash experts,” here are two examples of pickup trucks derailing trains:

http://www.scnews.com/news/2010-02-02/Front_Page/Driverless_truck_strikes_derails_train.html

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/07/17/amtrak-train-collides-with-truck-derails/

SO THERE!!! Now please go back to your “Talifan” camp in the mountains and try to come up with something less moronic that fits in with your “I had JJ” worldview.

MJ (lilac cashew)
May 17, 2011 12:58 pm

@29 “Please don’t take the lens flares comment as another bitchy comment, I was only saying it as a joke.”

@31 “I say this as a film maker, not as a ranter so please don’t say anything in that regard.”

Captain Nell, let me be blunt. You have this really annoying habbit of having these long posts where you infer in clever way these things you don’t like about Trek 09, and then you provide at the end of your posts “DISCLAIMERS” like the two statements above. Dude, the use of these disclaimers are not fooling anyone.

I would actually prefer if you were more direct and blunt with your views rather than trying to dance around things, get in clever inferences within you long-winded discourse, and then provide your trademark disclaimer at the end.

Sorry, but I am not going to let you have it both ways. :-)

captain_neill
May 17, 2011 1:15 pm

MJ

One thing, I found your comment about George Takei very distasteful, so you can be a bit nast y yourself.

I am just going to say I like the Abrams movie and leave it at that.

MJ (lilac cashew)
May 17, 2011 1:17 pm

@46. Very good — thanks for being direct. You are correct, I did go a bit overboard on Takei.

See how being direct is so easy!

gingerly
May 17, 2011 1:19 pm

Looks good, but I gotta say:

No, but seriously, it’s old school in the good way. :)

JMAN
May 17, 2011 1:42 pm

I just don’t get why everyone gets so upset about the lens flare. In both this clip and in ST 09, I barely even noticed it until everyone had a fit.

MJ (lilac cashew)
May 17, 2011 1:54 pm

@49. Yea, the irritating thing about all these anti-lens flare people, is that now when I watch Abrams’ productions the back of my mind is now watching for the lens flare, which reduces the enjoyment of the show. Before all the hoopla, I didn’t really notice the flares much — they seemed organic. Now, thanks to these detractors, I can’t hep but noticing them.

wpDiscuz