We, The Infected

Here is a new review on youtube. I'm interested on everyone's opinion on her review? Is it good? Bad? Just okay?

Demonstrates the dangers of mindless literary criticism?

Well, um, I made it 10 minutes into the critique. A lot of wasted energy on gender identity, but JAL left the door open for it. I've commented previously that I don't see how Eli/Elias' emasculation affects the plot in any way. The letting in of the right one, for both children, is about letting a normal human into his/her vampire world and letting a vampire into Oskar's personal world. The gender issue is not interesting in the novel, and it's a little confusing in the film.

What would change if Eli were an intact boy (or girl)? Why even wonder about how he/she became "nothing?" Oskar and Eli's sexual development would be cut short by their having been infected prior to achieving puberty. They are preteens, and thereby lies much of LTROI's charm.

What is of abiding importance to me is that I want them to survive, and I want them to be together when the end credits roll.

But this is John Ajvide's story, told with passion, conviction, and honesty. As a rabid fan, I take LTROI as it manifests, whether as the novel, the subsequent short story, the film(s), or the play. Or as it manifests in our wonderful fan fictions on WTI.

I agree with Don; too much analysis of gender identity, and too much digging around for symbolism that simply never existed in anyone's mind but her own -- largely because she seems to have either missed the point of the central theme entirely (the sharing of unconditional love), or is unconsciously making her own point about the social injustices still perpetrated on those who have genuine gender identity issues. She did make some interesting points, most of which have slipped my mind by now because they were lost in all the non-interesting ones.

I made it past 10.00..It only gets worse.Yet another reviewer that gets it so wrong.Why is she so fixated by sex? Should've known just by the outfit she has on.Talk about coming to wrong conclusions from the most tenuous of data.Did she really read the book or the movie?.From what she says it's like I've been reading and watching something completely different.OK.There's the gender thing but it doesn't change the central message of two pre-pubescent children discovering a love that doesn't rely on gender or sex.Even when Oskar realises that Eli was a boy he isn't fussed about it at all.He's confused but shrugs it off by realising it doesn't matter.Eli is a friend.A friend he loves and that's that.My greatest hope for our two little vampires (who I've grown to love) is that they continue on their beautiful journey always together and always in love.

I watched the whole thing, and her sarcastic Vampira act does grate just a bit. She does provide a good summary of the the whole novel-to-movie-to-not- so-great-remake- things that have been hashed out in great detail in this forum. For example she correctly points out that Håken did not start out like Oskar. If she dwells on sex too much, well so does the novel. I think she made a valid point about the gender issue. The term she is looking for I think is homophobia which was on ample display on the old IMDB discussion boards.

That Eli is an androgynous character is important for the story. I see Eli as this magical transforming character- the nothing that can be anything. I'm more impressed with the "trans" part of the story than the "gender" part. The film does this in its own visual way showing us different versions of Eli, more subtle perhaps but it stays true to this theme in the novel.

Vampira seems less impressed with the romance aspect of the story, for example she seems sarcastically dismissive of "Let the Old Dreams Die." This type of attitude will not go down well with us sentimental types at We The Infected. I would classify her as definitely not infected.

gattoparde59 wrote:This type of attitude will not go down well with us sentimental types at We The Infected. I would classify her as definitely not infected.

That made me laugh, I guess some poor unfortunate souls have a resistance to our infection. (poor kid)

I've watched her channel for awhile, the tone the show has changed in the last year or so. I am disappointed with this one, she has done better reviews in the past. I guess everyone sees and interprets things differently based on their points of view, environment and experiences.

After the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, it eventually came to pass that all art in any media was evaluated solely for whether it expressed the ideals of The Revolution, and finally if it did so only in the mode that they defined as "social realism". The only purpose for art was to further the message of The Revolution. This came to mind as I was watching this reviewer analyze JAL's novel through the prism of her transgender politics. It must be determined whether this story that dares to address issues of gender furthers her revolution. The best that I could gather, after sifting through a bewildering array of pseudo-intellectual buzzwords and transgender jargon, is that she found it to be not sufficiently politically correct.

John, when the knock comes on the door in the wee hours of the morning, accept your fate with grace. The gulag awaits.

Ah, yes, the gender issue.
I knew it would be a mess when it fell on social media politicians, say SJW or PC, liberals, etc of (mostly American) Tumblr. youtube, twitter, etc.

It is almost impossible for LTROI to really escape from that, from those who think the story is pushing the gender / progressive agenda, the liberal people thinking about the same thing (for better or for worse, like in this case)
And then LTORI would be either another propaganda of the LGBT lobby, or a transphobic / homophobic / heteronormative / "cis"normative take on the subject.

The thing is that JAL has no agenda whatsoever, he just wrote the characters / story as it is, and so it is. I do not even know what political opinion JAL has, and whaever it it is, is simply irrelevant.

"15. Posts of a political nature are not allowed."

I think the previous two posts could have made their points without straying into politics.