I'm drunk, let's do this. First, a quick back story. In 2004 a Swedish writer by the name of John Ajvide Lindqvist wrote a vampire novel called Låt den rätte komma in translated, Let the Right One In.
It was a new spin on the vampire genre that intertwined several separate stories but focused on a boy named Oskar who is regularly bullied at school and a "girl" named Eli, the vampire who befriends him. It was dark, it was sweet, it made me say "what the fuck?" a couple times, and, in 2008, it was made into a Swedish movie of the same name.
When the movie premiered stateside it received a lot of acclaim from genre fans, movie buffs, and critics alike. It was still in a niche though, not that many people saw it. So, as is the increasingly common case, in 2010 there was an American remake made called Let Me In
directed by Matt Reeves and staring Chloe Moretz (Kick-Ass) as "Abby" and some kid I know I've seen him in stuff but can't seem to put my finger on as "Owen" (obviously, just like on Ellis Island names have to be Americanized too). Oh, and it also stars Casey Jones. With a relatively weak opening weekend this film probably isn't going to be around much longer so I saw it today. Now, this review is difficult. Because it is a remake, I naturally have to try to break it up into two reviews. One as a stand alone film, the other as what it is, a remake.
First up, let's get all biases out of the way and review it as a remake. This is difficult because, to paraphrase a friend, it's like reviewing Jesus's son, no matter how good the kid is, his father is fucking Jesus. Though not as terrible as I expected there was a lot lacking. The pacing was completely off, the extra graphics were wanton, and it was noticeably dumbed down. My friend and I kept on joking that there should be a pop up video version of it. In the original story, Eli writes Oskar a note which simply is a Romeo and Juliet reference "I must be gone and live, or stay and die.". It's used in the movie, but not before the repetitive showing of Romeo and Juliet cramming down the viewers' collective throats and identifying that that is a reference to Romeo and Juliet. My other complaints are there was no real showing of the relationship of Abby (Eli) and "The Father" (Hakan). The side characters are also glanced over such as Eli's one victim Virginia who becomes a vampire herself. In the original it's very touching to see her realize what she has become and, knowing it's going to incinerate her, telling the nurse to open the curtains to her hospital room. My final complaint is "The Father" (played by Richard Jenkins) is the most bumbling serial killer ever. His first scene killing someone shows him stepping through ice and spilling a jug of blood. He had about as much screen time in the original Swedish film but the viewer was able to sympathize with him more because one could tell he has been doing this for a while, and when he finally gets caught it's one simple mistake that does him in. He was thrown into this relationship and role and is just starting to get tired and sloppy. The Americanized version uses him as comic relief, not as a character one can get behind and feel sorry for. I understand what they were doing and I'm all for being the first person to say "most Americans are dumb" but that doesn't mean you need to rip out the soul of a picture to make it more palatable. The movie was so stripped down for American audiences that it turned into Cliff Notes. Complaints aside, they still managed to keep at least some semblance of the relationship between Eli and Oskar, for the most part, in tact. Despite the computer generated effects, they also were able to show the dichotomy of Abby and what she really is.
as a remake 2 out of 6
Now that my ranting is done and over with, as a stand alone piece, it really wasn't that bad. There were a couple shots in the movie that really stood out. The first that comes to mind is when "The Father" is trying to speed away after killing his last victim. Most of the shot is from his point of view and you really get the feeling of anxiety as he's trying to pull this off. Yes, it is a Charlie Brown act because everything goes comically wrong (nothing goes together quite like homicide and slapstick kids) but the scene is intense. It's confusing, it's dizzying, it made my heart beat a bit faster. Another scene I utterly love besides the car accident is when Casey Jones/Elias Koteas/The Police Officer, is killed by Abby and he is reaching out to Owen to help him. That was a much appreciated addition because you really saw the horror of this beast and Owen just closes the door on this dying man. You could tell at this moment he not only accepts what kind of animal Abby is but what humanity he has to sacrifice to be with her.
On that note I mentioned in the previous section the relationship between Abby and Owen is, while not as deep as it was in the original, very much real. These were two star crossed lovers who relied on one another for comfort. The addition of the drunk, Jesus freak mother was also a nice touch and the pacing, while not nearly as fantastic as the original, was still slow enough to actually build to something.
Stand Alone movie 3 out of 6
I don't think that "The Father's" character is very distinct from Hakan's in the original film. I actually found the Swedish film much more comical in that respect. Is more incompetent to trip or to be chased away awkwardly by a yelping dog? In both cases, it's clear that his bumbling has more to do with his conscience than competence, so I don't think that's a fair criticism.
ReplyDeleteLikewise, I think there's a fair trade-off between the two interpretations of the murders. The remake uses these scenes to create a sort of character arc of visual motifs, establishing the back-seat camera angle anticipating the murder, repeating it with the second one, and climaxing when everything goes horribly wrong and the car careens out of control (along with his command of the situation) without breaking that angle. ("It's like poetry, you know? It rhymes." And I'm not just puking in stanzas.)
That said, this remake would've been the perfect opportunity to flesh out his character to the extent he was in the book, though I understand why they didn't. Much of the first half of the novel was told from his perspective, and we get a deep understanding of his past (a conflicted pedophile for whom Eli solves a torturous moral dilemma). His character was the most interesting thing about the novel, and once he died, I lost interest.
As for the crappy CG effects, I have nothing to say, but one thing to show.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfa8JwwY-y4