Comments on: New 30 Second ‘Super 8’ Clip Has At Least 30 Lens Flares In It

By: Kevin Klawitter

Kevin Klawitter — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

That last sentence came out wrong. Let me rephrase:

I don\’t come here because I think the writers are funny. I come here because you\’re great at reporting the latest movie news.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

What\’s with the hatred of lens flares? Part of the beauty of the anamorphic lens IS the flare. Do you hate \’Die Hard\’? That movie is J.J\’s wet dream.

By: Kevin Klawitter

Kevin Klawitter — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

Daniel, once something becomes cool to hate, nobody is allowed to ask why it\’s a bad thing. You just have to accept it as bad. It makes no sense, but that\’s the way the internet hate machine works, unfortunately.

By: Edward Davis

Edward Davis — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

humor, humor, humor. You guys might not think it\’s funny, but like tongue-in-cheek, people. Why do you insist on missing the part where we say it\’s the best looking movie of the summer. Oh people….

By: Liam

Liam — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

I never had a problem with lens flare, people say they are annoying but I didn\’t even notice them much in Star Trek.

By: Kevin Klawitter

Kevin Klawitter — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

Edward, if you gutys were actually making JOKES, i might think it was funny. Thing is, you\’re not.

What you practice here is snark at best. You expect us to laugh at a J.J. Abrams-related article simply because the term \”lens flare\” is mentioned, and it\’s become inexplicably cool to A) hate them and B) associate them with J.J. Abrams. Where\’s the satiric slant? What\’s the perspective? Where\’s the joke?

I get accused of being humorless a lot whem I\’m on the internet. I can accept that. I just expect a sense of perspective, logic, intelligence to my comedy, instead of just bandwagon snark and mean-spiritedness.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

Oh, we get it. It\’s just that J.J. seems to be the only one who gets the jabs. There are very few filmmakers out there who are loyal to anamorphic glass, but J.J. seems to love the look it gives him. \’Star Trek\’ went overboard, yes, but in more ways than just lens flares.

By: Edward Davis

Edward Davis — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

\”I get accused of being humorless a lot whem I’m on the internet. \”

You don\’t say? 😉

\”What you practice here is snark at best.\”
Maybe we just don\’t take it all as seriously as you? It\’s not particularly mean-spirited. Have you never heard of simultaneous send-up and celebration?

Anyhow, as always, feel free to change the channel instead of hurt yourself.

By: Kevin Klawitter

Kevin Klawitter — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

Yeah, I take comedy seriously. Why shouldn\’t I? Is there something noble about laughing at the mematic nonsense that\’s only considered funny because it\’s been constantly repeated?

And I don\’t come here because I think the writers are talented. I come here because you guys are great at getting news.

By: david

david — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

check out my #IfJJAbramsDirected twitter hashtag then fire up Photoshop and play along! it\’ll be lens-flare-spectacular.

By: tristan eldritch

tristan eldritch — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

The point made in the article is completely justified. The clip looks beautiful….except for the damn lens flares.

By: rodie

rodie — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

Is that really how this film is cut? It feels way way way too fast to me. It\’s a 30 second clip and there\’s no room to breathe in it at all.

By: Christopher Bell

Christopher Bell — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

Kevin Klawitter,

What\’s a \”gutys\”

By: Lt. Riggs

Lt. Riggs — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

all of you people are catty bitches.

By: Gilbag

Gilbag — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

JJ has anamorphic lenses on his glasses

By: up all night

up all night — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

BRING IT!

By: LA2000

LA2000 — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

Gee, I hope that\’s not an actual clip because the cutting is almost incomprehensible. It\’s as if someone stood beside the editor screaming \”faster.\” It has no build. No art. Just a hurried mess. And it feels absolutely nothing like Spielberg, a man who knew how to take his time and create mood and suspense.

And people, those \”flares\” are mostly (if not entirely) digital. They are post production fakes. And yes, they put in waaaaay too many. It\’s almost more of an insecure visual tick than an homage to anamorphic filmmaking.

I hope this clip is just an aberration of misguided marketing and does not in any substantive way reflect the actual movie. Because I was really looking forward to this.

And now, not so much.

By: doctor fart

doctor fart — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:32:59 +0000

if i was LA2000 i\’d stab myself in the crotch to teach myself a lesson about being an arrogant dickhead with too much criticism coursing through my veins.