saw this at last.

[Midwest]

I mightve liked it better but then again a person shouldnt have to try and forget LTROI to appreciate LMI when it had the benefit of the original for its making. If I sound mildly bitter it is because when I watched LMI I had the distinct feeling that it was trying to get away with fooling people into thinking that this was the original and not a remake.

Bulls eye.

I do think they are good actors and deserve more credit than they usually get by reviewers. I think the scene with 'Be me a little' that was cut was more touching than the one with Lina.

Do you mean by users on this board or by critics? If by critics I don't believe one really said Chloe & Kodi's performance were bad. If I remember, most if not all said they did a good job.

[SPiN]

Owen and abby in the gym, bed scene, bleeding scene, and the pool scene just doesn't seem right however you slice it. Sure the LTROI is more of as love stroy, but if Reeves was trying to make the characters have similar chemistry, he should have picked his cast carefully. Abby and Owen looked to me as if they were saying, "Well, we're gonna have to say these lines... let's just get it over with."

One of the problems with statements like this is that it sounds as if you're insulting everyone who saw something very real between those characters. Whether you intended it or not, that is how fans of LMI will often (not always) experience upon reading such.

Myself, I tend to think a lot of folks don't react so much to performances as to a more mysterious chemistry about character and actor. I'll admit there are actors I cannot stand, regardless of what they play. Not many, though. But I have seen many a person react in disdain to an interpretation they dislike and thus impugn the actor's abilities--even though what they (sometimes) are reacting to is a disagreement about choice.

Case in point--the (odd, to me) assumption that Abby is an evil, manipulative bitch who cares nothing for Owen. Methinks this opinion says far more about the person holding it than about either Reeves' screenplay or Chloe Grace Moretz' performance. Indeed, it is a difficult thing to support when you see Abby do things like watch Owen when he isn't looking--watch him with what sure looks like the beginning of a crush. Likewise Abby's reaching out to touch Thomas at his most wretched (before he goes out for the last time) is something that makes perfect sense to me--displaying a relationship of great complexity.

But another problem is that if an actor has already performed a given role and done it splendidly, having another actor do the part can feel jarring. We loved Lena's take on Eli that almost automatically we compare Chloe's Abby. Yet quality is not a linear scale. Doing that role does not require copying someone else's performance as rigidly as possible, no matter how wonderful that particular actress nailed it.

Myself, I saw a powerful relationship between Abby and Owen begin and grow. That you did not is something I simply take on trust. Kindly assume that maybe others really did see something you did not--whether either of us is wise to have done so (or not).

Co-sign.

[Bustedstuff15]

I havnt read everyones post but I am gona reply from what I have read.

First off Chloe and Kodi were not allowed to see the original movie or read the book until after the movie was finished. So there was no way they could have played similar parts. Reeves script and characters were both very different than JAL's and it also took place in a different country. They are going to act differently. That being said the first time I saw LMI (which I saw before LTROI or read the book) I never once looked at Abbey as a manipulative bitch. I saw her as a survivor and I saw her as somebody who really loved the people helping her. I didnt really pay to much attention to Thomas's back story as it was a side note in the movie compared to the relationship between Owen and Abby.

All this being said I do like LTROI better and mostly everything about the movie is better. But that doesnt mean that LMI should be trashed the way it is. In fact I strongly believe if LTROI was never made and LMI stood alone most people who hate it would have loved it. Although a lot of posters have said they wanted to like it and tried not to compare it to LTROI it is impossible to do.

I think we need to appreciate both films no matter which one we like more. LTROI is just the holy grail of all movies. But if LMI hadnt come along a lot of people may never had seen LTROI. Thats not because were lazy Americans but because we simply had never heard of it. Its not like it was heavily advertised over here after all.

[DavidZahir]

Owen and abby in the gym, bed scene, bleeding scene, and the pool scene just doesn't seem right however you slice it. Sure the LTROI is more of as love stroy, but if Reeves was trying to make the characters have similar chemistry, he should have picked his cast carefully. Abby and Owen looked to me as if they were saying, "Well, we're gonna have to say these lines... let's just get it over with."

One of the problems with statements like this is that it sounds as if you're insulting everyone who saw something very real between those characters. Whether you intended it or not, that is how fans of LMI will often (not always) experience upon reading such.

Myself, I tend to think a lot of folks don't react so much to performances as to a more mysterious chemistry about character and actor. I'll admit there are actors I cannot stand, regardless of what they play. Not many, though. But I have seen many a person react in disdain to an interpretation they dislike and thus impugn the actor's abilities--even though what they (sometimes) are reacting to is a disagreement about choice.

Case in point--the (odd, to me) assumption that Abby is an evil, manipulative b**** who cares nothing for Owen. Methinks this opinion says far more about the person holding it than about either Reeves' screenplay or Chloe Grace Moretz' performance. Indeed, it is a difficult thing to support when you see Abby do things like watch Owen when he isn't looking--watch him with what sure looks like the beginning of a crush. Likewise Abby's reaching out to touch Thomas at his most wretched (before he goes out for the last time) is something that makes perfect sense to me--displaying a relationship of great complexity.

But another problem is that if an actor has already performed a given role and done it splendidly, having another actor do the part can feel jarring. We loved Lena's take on Eli that almost automatically we compare Chloe's Abby. Yet quality is not a linear scale. Doing that role does not require copying someone else's performance as rigidly as possible, no matter how wonderful that particular actress nailed it.

Myself, I saw a powerful relationship between Abby and Owen begin and grow. That you did not is something I simply take on trust. Kindly assume that maybe others really did see something you did not--whether either of us is wise to have done so (or not).

[Frogster]

Man, people just be hatin' on ol LMI, but I don't see why. I have to agree with David Zahir.

Not only that, but I think that the movie's title says it all. To me there are a few pivot points this movie revolves around that change it drastically. The first is simply the title. Let Me In. Says it all right there. It isn't about letting the right one in (both into your life and your heart), it's about letting her in, one way or another. The general tone of the movie is a little more sinister than LTROI, and I think this matches with the notion that Abby is supposed to be, as Dave Zahir said (though in the negative), a manipulative little bitch. Now that doesn't mean she doesn't have feelings for Owen (I also agree with DZ, that she does have tender moments with Owen and Thomas that strongly argue for her having emotional investment in both of them), just that I think the director made a conscious choice to emphasize the manipulative, parasitical parts of Abby and her existence as a vampire. That was the whole point of the title, I think: that's how she survives, she convinces you to let her in--remember, when Owen saves her from the blood effusion when she comes in without invitation, she says "I knew you wouldn't let me [die]," in a great, deadpan voice (one can argue it wasn't deadpan, but please, watch it again and see if it doesn't strike you as a resigned and just a little impassive). Again, these don't mean there isn't any complexity to her emotions or the relationships, only that a large aspect of her existence is as a parasite who uses her charms to convince others to let her in.

That's the whole point of making Thomas/caretaker who he is in the movie. We are absolutely supposed to believe that Owen has great potential to become just like him. What else is "have some now, save some for later" supposed to intimate?

The second point is the pool scene. As many have noticed, the beautiful scene of Eli and Oskar gazing at each other has been replaced by Owen staring at Abby's feet. Do people really think this wasn't a conscious choice by Matt Reeves? Abby saves Owen in his darkest hour, and when we see her feet we know he is going to be at them, with her as master (again, don't get me wrong, I think she does have feelings for Owen, but they aren't the main point in this movie). Then we see the train scene and him singing Now and Later. Reeves isn't stupid, and nothing is in that movie that isn't supposed to be. Reeves is a good director, cunning and methodical. He knows this movie is supposed to be a horror, and it is. The horror of how a vampire girl survives, and the sad destiny of those she attracts, and who fall in love with her. Owen is singing his own fate, and he doesn't even know it. If that ain't horrifying, I don't know what is.

I think this is a very subtle story that has lots of emotional content between Owen and Abby, but just because it isn't the same sort of "love" as between Oskar and Eli doesn't mean people have to impugn it. It is a sort of love, but Reeves made conscious decisions to highlight certain aspects of the story, and those enhancements change the dynamic so drastically that LMI and LTROI are consequently almost entirely different films. I love them both, but it makes me sad when people get all doom and gloom on LMI, because it has some wonderful merits, and deserves to be judged on those merits.

I'd just like people to try and divorce the two, because it is to compare apples and oranges. That's why I think JAL was able to like both, because he (rightly) recognized the vast gulf between the two, and could appreciate both as distinct entities that retained a certain core of what he was trying to do in the novel.

Obviously there's more, but I'll leave off my defense for now

All this, so much so


LMI is a darker movie than LTROI. It's still touching but in different places. The movies only appear similar on the surface, the dynamic between the characters has changed.

[tman]

Had to chip in here. While I've read all the comments here on peoples opionions of LTROI/LMI, I believe you can seperate the films. LMI is not, and never was a remake of LTROI. It's a re-interpreation of the novel from a different director, using the same source for inspiration. Sure some scenes were very similar, but that's only because the book has them as well. The characters portrayed in LMI were done with a different angle on things, a different perspective. Many just seemed to go from LTROI (which many loved), see a US 'remake' on the cards, and just slate the hell out of it, not for taking the film as it is, but because it's a 'remake' in their eyes, and it CANT be as good as LTROI, never, not in a million years.

Everyone has their own opionions, and they're entitled to them, but it seems a little agressive sometimes that because someone likes something someone else doesn't, everyone has to know about it. If LMI didn't work for you, fine, but it worked for a LOT of people, in a way few have experienced before (me included). There was nothing about the movie I didn't like. It was exceptionally well done, and I totally took Abby to be a child who was inflicted with this disease which she can do nothing about. If you recall 'I need blood to survive'. That's a strong statement, 'survive'. She's not doing this for kicks, and if she didn't have companions, would probably have topped herself by walking into the daylight many years ago. How she feels about those companions is what made this movie so special. The build up with the Owen relationship/break down with Thomas was fantastically well done. Did Abby originally ask Thomas to start killing for her, or did he offer so she wouldn't be put at risk? Love would have to run pretty deep to kill for someone, and that's what the underlying storyline touched on, love and love-lost. I totally felt for all the main characters, and thought they were perfectly cast for what was being asked of them in this interpretation of the book. Chloe/Kodi absolutely nailed the parts as far as I'm concerned, and all other supporting characters were spot on.

Just my feelings on this. It's been a tough few weeks (post LMI!)

[ofelia]

I do think they are good actors and deserve more credit than they usually get by reviewers. I think the scene with 'Be me a little' that was cut was more touching than the one with Lina.

Do you mean by users on this board or by critics? If by critics I don't believe one really said Chloe & Kodi's performance were bad. If I remember, most if not all said they did a good job.

Probably users on this board. I actually don't remember all that much but I seemed to keep reading about them being wooden, and I thought that that scene and some of the scenes where the bullies go after Owen were visibly emotional.

LMI is not, and never was a remake of LTROI. It's a re-interpreation of the novel from a different director, using the same source for inspiration. Sure some scenes were very similar, but that's only because the book has them as well.

Um, the peek scene? That little twirl after Eli/Abby puts on the dress? The climb out the window? None of that was in the book. That was copied from one film to another. I don't hate LMI, just pointing out a fact...

[SPiN]

Owen and abby in the gym, bed scene, bleeding scene, and the pool scene just doesn't seem right however you slice it. Sure the LTROI is more of as love stroy, but if Reeves was trying to make the characters have similar chemistry, he should have picked his cast carefully. Abby and Owen looked to me as if they were saying, "Well, we're gonna have to say these lines... let's just get it over with."

One of the problems with statements like this is that it sounds as if you're insulting everyone who saw something very real between those characters. Whether you intended it or not, that is how fans of LMI will often (not always) experience upon reading such.

Reeves did pick his cast carefully. Very carefully. these parts could have been complete failures and all those who praise LTROI would have a crutch to stand on. but Reeves hit a grandslam.

Case in point--the (odd, to me) assumption that Abby is an evil, manipulative bitch who cares nothing for Owen. Methinks this opinion says far more about the person holding it than about either Reeves' screenplay or Chloe Grace Moretz' performance. Indeed, it is a difficult thing to support when you see Abby do things like watch Owen when he isn't looking--watch him with what sure looks like the beginning of a crush. Likewise Abby's reaching out to touch Thomas at his most wretched (before he goes out for the last time) is something that makes perfect sense to me--displaying a relationship of great complexity.

ya, it does come across that the displeasure is not so much with scene by scene rip off...but maybe the scenes in LMI were better acted. thats my opinion. ive never said one bad thing about the original. ive never compared the two. i think the Original is a great film.
everything ive said is simply based on the LMI film. this is a LMI forum.
no need to step on LMI's neck or bring it down because it doesnt compare to the original. its really not the same. there are two DIFFERENCES that make the comparisons ill-legit.

But another problem is that if an actor has already performed a given role and done it splendidly, having another actor do the part can feel jarring. We loved Lena's take on Eli that almost automatically we compare Chloe's Abby. Yet quality is not a linear scale. Doing that role does not require copying someone else's performance as rigidly as possible, no matter how wonderful that particular actress nailed it.

yep

Myself, I saw a powerful relationship between Abby and Owen begin and grow. That you did not is something I simply take on trust. Kindly assume that maybe others really did see something you did not--whether either of us is wise to have done so (or not).

double yep.

[SPiN]

celedril wrote:
Man, people just be hatin' on ol LMI, but I don't see why. I have to agree with David Zahir.

co-sign.

[SPiN]

I believe you can seperate the films. LMI is not, and never was a remake of LTROI. It's a re-interpreation of the novel from a different director, using the same source for inspiration. Sure some scenes were very similar, but that's only because the book has them as well.

just a friendly reminder.its ok to breathe.