[spoiler]The monster was using the stolen equipment to build the giant magnet in order to attract his ship parts. The engines generated the electricity, the microwaves provided the electro-magnets etc.
In the meantime he decided to exact his revenge on the military who hurt him. Woodward basically spelled that out in his pre-death speech. It wasn’t until the monster touched the kid and learned from his experiences that he saw it was better to leave. He saw how the kid learned to move on following the death of his mother while he watched his father and the girls father self destruct in guilt and anger. That showed him that he should set aside his rage and just go home and move on.
The model train had nothing to do with it. [/spoiler]
Since the movie takes place in June 1979 (as established by the headstone for the mother saying she died February 1979) the mention of Rubki’s Cubes is another anachronism.
I thought the movie was fluffy fun. Nothing I ever need to see again and it went a bit off the rails in the last 30 minutes. There was amusing stuff but not really funny stuff. Elle Fanning was too much better an actor than the other kids as it made their pedestrian child-actor skills stick out a bit.
Two things I wouldn’t have minded some clearer explanation of:
[spoiler]
Just one line explaining why after 25 years they were moving the alien cross country (and why they were moving the magic spaceship with it instead of separately).
Why the alien was snatching people. There’s a line about food, but the first person snatched was still alive (and apparently had survived pretty well without water for a couple days).[/spoiler]
Yes, an 8-10 year old would enjoy it. I plan on taking my 9yo daughter this weekend - she’ll love it, but then, she’s into scary monster movies and big, pretty explosions.
IMHO, the movie was a lot of fun and likely the most comprehensive Spielberg homage we’ll ever see.
I thought the ending was a bit disjointed (what happened to the wildfire?) and delved into ET territory a bit too much (I was expecting flying bikes at one point), however the kids were extremely believable (especially Elliot… er, James) and the movie wasn’t full of adults doing stupid/mean things for stupid/mean reasons, (unlike so many films with child protagonists).
I liked it but didn’t love it. It just never rose to the level of stirring my emotions like the rare great movie does. Just a couple thing bothered me as the story progressed:
-They seemed to be going for the small town feel having just a handful of police force for the town, but when they did wide shots of the town it just looked waaay too big.
-The alien was so large it was hard to believe he was sneaking around at night collecting car parts and microwave ovens undetected.
-I must have missed the part of how/why the sheriff and lady in curlers regained conciousness when they did. Joe needed to slap the girl in the face to wake her but the other two just awoke out of their sleep at the same time?
-I thought it was odd that even though the two dads had some kind of history together and the girl was friends with all the boys that she made the comment about “you must be the deputy’s kid” like she had never met him before.
There are a couple of drug references as well, especially regarding one character who smokes a joint and calls out “I’m soooo stoned!” This isn’t a major character however, so he’s not on the screen for long.
The gas station attendant had a Sony Walkman about a month before they were actually available for retail sale. (And in the hinterlands like small-town Ohio, they didn’t really catch on until 1980-81.)
One of the kids made a Rubik’s Cube reference. Although it had been invented by then, it didn’t become available in the US until 1980.
On the plus side, it was pretty cool that the teenage sister was sporting a “Farrah.” Should have been more feather cuts on the dudes, though.
Cool to see all the old 70s comics and toys in the background in the kids’ rooms.
Would have liked to hear more 1979 songs in the background.
Saw it yesterday; first movie I’ve seen in a theater in years. Meh. It was decent enough, I guess. That Fanning girl has real charisma, and the main boy kid had some as well, but the rest of the kids had absolutely none. Tough to watch scenes with them.
While the leads were the best, I thought all the kids did a great job. I especially liked the little pyromaniac/zombie. The kid on the phone moving his mouth was priceless. They all had little moments to shine and did.
_________________ o _________________
I have to say that I was very glad I didn’t see any commercials before seeing it. The only thing I’d read was the story of how - ----Abrams— - had worked on restoring Spielberg’s 8mm movies when Abrams was only about 15. That put me in the right mindset. The commercials, on the other, hand seem to be marketing it as a summer blockbuster. It’s not without its big noisy action scenes, but anyone expecting that to be the main part of the movie is sure to be disappointed. Apparently it’s a sort of merging of two stories, from what Abrams said on the Daily Show the other night.
I really liked the movie but felt it was not without its flaws. The creature, especially toward the end, seemed to not make a whole lot of sense. It can form psychic bonds and understand human thoughts but doesn’t mind chomping on humans when livestock are available? (Though the dogs ran away, there are horses or cows in another scene). ________________ ________ _______
--------====O=-O- - -While most of the flaws could be explained away, I felt that there should have been explanation in the story for it.
But the characters were all very well-written, and put together excellently. The girl’s dad was one that almost surprised me — instead of being stereotyped, or whiplashing him around to fit the plot, his characterization made a lot of sense. ________ . … ______
The article I read said that Spielberg called this Abrams first real movie, as it’s such a personal story. I think it’s a fairly accurate description. This encapsulates nearly every element of Abrams style, and is something that really could not have been made by anyone else. Right down to the warts.
As for the acting, I thought the kids were all pretty good, with Elle Fanning as a real stand-out. The others I thought were intentionally written with a nod to the stock characters from that period, and I think the actors did fine with it. Also, there were some annoying visual distractions.
Saw it yesterday. I was immediately annoyed with all the fucking lens flares. And the random work lights that were obviously placed to light up the scene. It really broke my sense of disbelief. I mean really, they were these bright balls of light in the sky. What were they? Helicopters? Work lights? What the fuck?
OK that said, I really enjoyed it. I’m glad I saw the trailer and said “I’m going to see this without looking it up, if I do it’ll ruin it” and I’m glad I did. I loved the 70’s nostalgia, even though I barely remember it. I also had that same Shuttle poster!
I’m pretty sure things went off the rails in the first 30 minutes, not the last
I’d have to see the whole scene again but didn’t Alice park her dad’s car directly adjacent to the train station before the crash? Then we see a rail car totally annihilate the station along with a massive explosion?
I thought it was odd to have them hop back into the unscathed car to escape.
