I need to move on... (again) from LTROI

[Drugula]

Hi there,

New here.

Happy New Year to all The Infected!

(Forgive the possible grammar and tenses mistakes, french is my mother tongue.)

In fact, I'm an old Infected myself since I first saw "låt den rätte komma in" back in 2008 or 2009? Can't remember. I was fascinated. The film stayed in my mind for months.

Then, with the time passing, I almost forgot about it... until I read, a year ago, and for the second time "Salem's Lot" by Stephen King. I liked the way he portrayed vampires.
So, while finishing the book, I asked myself: "Are there any other great vampires novels out there?" I was thinking about "Interview with the Vampire" that I had read a very long time ago, then I thought about "I Am Legend", and then, finally LTROI came back into my mind... this beautiful movie... was it adapted from a novel? Of course it was!

So, I finished the novel about two weeks ago now. Reading it was a very strange experience for me: as if I was watching all the deleted scenes from the movie.
I couldn't portray the characters otherwise than the talented actors from the swedish film. 11 year old Lina definitely IS Eli and will be forever, same for Oskar, his parents, Håkan, and so on.
I even thought the scene when Oskar and Eli were fighting on the floor was in the film... certainly because I saw this picture on the net:



I then learned this shot was actually taken from the bonus deleted scenes from the DVD/Blu-Ray. I didn't even know these scenes existed!

I didn't rewatch the whole movie yet (my Blu-Ray copy with the deleted scenes is on the way) just some minor scenes on YouTube to get the atmosphere again.

BUT there is a problem now... I can't help myself thinking the film is not complete! Yes, the flashback scene... of course I know this particular subject has already been debated here: http://www.let-the-right-one-in.com/for ... ?f=2&t=966

and I also read two interviews with director Tomas Alfredson where he said there was a planned scene, but that let out too much of Eli's backstory. And I also know about the pig...

When I was reading the flashback scene, I was somehow upset, a little angry at the director. I felt cheated because I didn't know Eli was born as a boy when I first saw the movie. Then I tried to imagine the scene in the film without the use of Lina being there (We're talking about child torture here!) and I was even more upset as I was distracted while reading!

Actually, as far as I remember (10 years) I did feel there was a little something weird with Eli/Lina... first her deep voice for a 12 year old girl? Then her clothes, always in pants, except when she is in sweater and panties in her apartment (she's portrayed like this in the novel)
And the way she was standing up there on the jungle gym... yes, she definitely was a little androgynous. But the "peek" shot was so quick, ok what I saw didn't look like a regular female genital... but to me it was like she had no genital because of vampirism. That's it.
I mean, how could have I connected the dots given the few info the director gave me?

Something important is missing. That's a point.

The best solution to add the flashback scene would have been like the user Marok described in his post, in "The missing flashback" topic (link above, page 3):

Re: The missing flashback

Post by Marok » Wed Jan 07, 2015 3:17 am
Having read the novel by now I think i would’ve liked to see some kind of flashback in the movie as well.

Actually I think a possible flashback scene could be starting out just as the book implies – having Oskar relive these memories of Eli; being Eli in this vision.
In just the same way this flashback could play out – seeing glimpses or snippets of memories from Elis point of view, through Elias’ eyes.
There wouldn’t have been a need to make Lina look more “boyish”, no painful expression and no “nasty” images. It would still be implied, absolutely, and maybe this would already be too much.

Nevertheless, I’ve been putting some thoughts into a possible "screenplay" of that flashback, which I’ll express:

The scene fades in and we see a hall, there’s a long table in the middle with lots of dainties on it. There’re several children approaching the table, laughing, taking some of the food.
Maybe the picture has some filter applied to it, making it look a bit worn out, faded. The sounds, everything the viewer hears, like the laughing children, are muffled. As if our hearing is deafened, heard from a distance, through a wall or something. The film doesn’t play at normal speed, it’s slightly reduced, not slow motion, but somewhere in between. All of this in order to establish a surreal atmosphere, dreamlike.
The camera moves on, approaches the table and we see an arm getting in our view, reaching for something on the table, an apple maybe. It’s “our” arm; we’re looking through the eyes of somebody else. Eli told Oskar, “be me for a while”, it “clicks” – we’re Eli now, Eli of the past.
The camera, Elias' head, turns. It focuses on a bewigged man, the lord - he stares at us, stares at Elias, puts on a brief smile, a sinister one.

Cut, change of scenery

As the scene fades in, a dimly lit room is shown. The camera follows down one of Elias’ arms, its strapped at the wrist, strapped on … a table? Elias is lying on a table, on his belly? Then there’s a man, a bowl and a knife in his hands, approaching us, Elias. The picture turns black … a painful scream - still muffled, sounding unreal.
The picture fades in again, slowly, as Elias is slowly opening his eyes, blinking one or two times. He is breathing heavily, wailing. The bewigged man, the lord, is back, approaching Elias, showing his teeth, his … fangs.


We’re back in Oskar’s apartment, the flashback is over; the movie just plays along as we know it. There is no need to show the biting, we know what’s going to happen and from Elias’ point of view we couldn’t see it anyway.
With Oskar peeking into the bedroom, the glimpse of the neutering scar, the viewer knows what happened.



On a final note, I re-read what I just wrote above a couple times before posting it.
Perhaps I just made it all worse. Is there a more horrible way to show these events than from Elis point of view - experiencing these horrors from a first person perspective? I don’t know …
The book kicked me in the guts a couple times; this flashback was one of these occasions.

Except for the fact that Marok should have mentioned "Littles boys" instead of "Childrens". That changes everything if it's a POV scene!

Even the unnecessary american remake attempted a flashback scene where whe have glimpse of the Lord: his eyes, lots of rings on his fingers... the rest is just a mess of a scene:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_wVExyVmu0

But the Marok's POV solution combined with a little gritty, subtle blurry effect similar to the deleted scene from the remake could have worked IMO.

Now, don't get me wrong, I still love the movie: the filming, the acting, the eerie melancholic atmosphere. There is also things I didn' like at all in the novel: Håkan return into a Zombie pedophile for example... the scene with zombie Håkan and Tommy in the basement actually reminded me of "Coraline" great graphic novel adaptation. One-eyed bloated, grotesque disfigured monster:





To conclude, I find it someway regrettable that you must absolutely read the novel to have the complete answer to your question.
The film with the addition of the deleted fighting scene (why did they remove it anyway? it's one of the best scene in the book), and maybe also the "Oskar screaming like a pig" deleted scene, it's a very humiliating and violent scene that would have added to understand Oskar's desire for vengeance. Combined with the flashback scene, the movie would have been complete, exactly like the novel but more poetic.

It took me 10 damn years to have my answer!

As a special BONUS for this awfully long post, I also have the answer to another scene I couldn't really understand cause I don't speak Swedish.
A little before the scene when Oskar beat the bully leader up with a stick on a frozen lake. We can see all the kids and teachers ready for ice skating, and Mr. Ávila warning the kids to stay away from holes in the ice.
I saw the film in swedish with official french subtitles, but the translation was kinda silly. So, I was wondering why the female teacher laughed at Ávila.

Here is the dialogue:

- Mr. Ávila: "Akta med ishålet därborta! Uppfattat?"

- Female teacher: "Avila, det heter isvak."

- Mr. Ávila: -"Isvak, ja."
- "Jag menade isvak!"

Google Translation gave me "hole in the ice" for both the words "ishålet" and "isvak".

Official english subtitles translation:

- Watch out for holy, over there. Understood?
- Avila... it's "a hole in the ice".
- Oh... I meant "hole in the ice".

So, I asked on a swedish language forum, and there is an aswer from a native:

Re: "isvak" / "ishålet" what's the difference?

Post by Johanna » 2018-12-02, 16:41

Because the world for a hole in the ice large enough for a human to fit through it is vak. Even isvak sounds a bit unusual, at least around here, especially since that is- part is a bit redundant.

Ishål isn't even a word and if it were, it would be a hole filled with ice and not at all the same thing. A small hole in the ice, like one you've drilled for fishing, is called exactly the same as in English: ett hål i isen.

I guess it's because the film didn't mention that Mr. Ávila is actually of spanish origin...

Ok, that's all I have to say to move on again...

[metoo]

I guess it's because the film didn't mention that Mr. Ávila is actually of spanish origin...

This is rather obvious to a Swedish listener, due to his accent. Well, at least it's obvious that Ávila's native language isn't Swedish. Thus, there was no need to make this fact more explicit for the intended Swedish audience, but it of course gets lost on non-Swedish audiences.

[dongregg]

A big welcome to you, Drugula.

I read and reread your wonderful post.

My history is this. I read an Ebert review in 2009, then forgot almost everything but the creepy title. In March 2013, I saw that the film was scheduled on Show Time, so I was able to watch it on my TV from the start. Honestly, I was hooked during the opening credits, the night snowstorm, and Eli in the taxi. Arriving at the apartments. But I didn't fall totally in love with Eli until she cocked her head to one side and asked, "What are you doing?"

For the next few months, I found everything on the Internet about the film. Bought it from Amazon so I could watch I at home or at work. (DVR, CD, Blu-Ray soon followed. Downloaded the Söderqvist sound track.) I joined the forum in July 2013..

Members kept pounding on me to buy the novel. Three years later, I did.

To me, our fan club falls into two groups--those who see everything about LTROI as a seamless whole, and a small group who sees the film, the book, the Jack Thorne play, and the awesome fan fictions on our forum as separate artistic creations. The same things that confused you about the film also confused me, but much was made clear after I joined the forum. There are deleted scenes I wish had been left in, especially Oskar and Eli playing Bulleri bulleri bock on the pile of snow. But I don't worry about the gender identity or other things that would have clarified Eli's backstory. I just remember the feelings I have when watching the film or listening to the sound track. Feelings that I still have.

[Drugula]

@metoo thanks to clarify this a little more. I finally get it now.

@dongregg Yep, your history with LTROI is pretty similar to mine. I bet it's the same story for every fan who watched the film before reading the novel. What about those who did the opposite?

But I don't worry about the gender identity or other things that would have clarified Eli's backstory. I just remember the feelings I have when watching the film or listening to the sound track. Feelings that I still have.

I understand that cinematography and writing are two different things. Maybe you're right. After all, as Eli says in the book: "- I'm nothing. Not a child. Not old. Not a boy. Not a girl. Nothing."

The film has a very subtle way to deal with that. So subtle, in fact, that becomes confusing. But as I said in my post, I felt there was something androgynous with Eli/Lina when I first saw the film. That means there are some hints to understand what we are supposed to see in the "peek" shot, even if I missed it.

So, in the end I'm find with it. At least, they dealt with it. The american remake did not.

Like member Awes said in in his post: http://www.let-the-right-one-in.com/for ... f=2&t=5584
When speaking of both the film and the novel:

They are two separated universes, with their own particularities, but sometimes they merge into only one, reinforcing mutually.

I couldn't have said it better.

Can't wait to rewatch it with the deleted scenes... after 10 years!

[Phobos]

until I read, a year ago, and for the second time "Salem's Lot" by Stephen King. I liked the way he portrayed vampires.

great novel, too. I hink it was my first novel by Stephen King as well. Still like it to this day, i even own a DVD of the FIlm. (which wasn´t that great)

But as I said in my post, I felt there was something androgynous with Eli/Lina when I first saw the film.

i think they are making allusions in the film, for people to become more interested in reading the book (if they haven´t already)
Works fine for me, as i first stumbled upon LMI, then LTROI Film and then LTROI novel

[Drugula]

great novel, too. I hink it was my first novel by Stephen King as well. Still like it to this day, i even own a DVD of the FIlm. (which wasn´t that great)

Yeah, it's one of the few vampires novels that quite worked for me. I read it after seeing the 1979 TV adaptation.
Then, I found the adaptation wasn't' faithfull enough to the book, so I watched the 2004 second adaptation which was faithfull enough, but I can't bear Rob Lowe... David (Hutch) Soul was way more convincing.

i think they are making allusions in the film, for people to become more interested in reading the book (if they haven´t already)
Works fine for me, as i first stumbled upon LMI, then LTROI Film and then LTROI novel

What I find odd now is that after seeing LTROI at the movies in 2009, I didn't try to go further... it was like the film was enough for me, like a precious jewel in my mind. Maybe I was too busy too, I don't know.
Thanks to you dear Stephen King!

[Drugula]

Just saw this: https://imgur.com/a/syjsp8a

Watched the trailer and I thought: "What is that? Another american attempt to re-remake LTROI?"

The Dark (2018): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08u8wwHu4N4

[dongregg]

Very disturbing! The trailer didn't have LTROI vibes for me, but it will probably be a classic. It's just so scary!

[PeteMork]

Yep I think this one is promising.