Not-Smart Criticisms of LMI
Moderator: LMI Moderator
-
a_contemplative_life
- Moderator
- Posts: 5896
- Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 2:06 am
- Location: Virginia, USA
Re: Not-Smart Criticisms of LMI
I think it's time for a sequel to both films. Someone submit some scripts!
-
DavidZahir
- Posts: 694
- Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 4:24 am
Re: Not-Smart Criticisms of LMI
I not opposed to the notion, but the leads would have to be recast now. None of those four look like little kids any more (especially the two Swedes).
O let my name be in the Book of Love. If it be there I care not
For that Other great Book above. Strike it out! Or write it in anew--
But let My name be in the Book of Love! -- Omar Kayam
For that Other great Book above. Strike it out! Or write it in anew--
But let My name be in the Book of Love! -- Omar Kayam
Re: Not-Smart Criticisms of LMI
John has already written an epilogue, and I'm sure he could make a script if he wants. However in an interview in Oslo last January (ad the Norwegian translation of Little Star) he said he don't like vampires, so then again maybe not.
For the heart life is simple. It beats as long as it can.
- Karl Ove Knausgård
- Karl Ove Knausgård
-
sauvin
- Moderator
- Posts: 3410
- Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 5:52 am
- Location: A cornfield in heartland USA
Re: Not-Smart Criticisms of LMI
Yea. No. Hedebrandt is a man now, no two ways about it. If he's to act Oskar's role again in a sequel, he's going to have to be an unturned Oskar. I'm somehow doubting he could pull of the growing darkness of becoming a Thomas or an Oskar at 40.DavidZahir wrote:I not opposed to the notion, but the leads would have to be recast now. None of those four look like little kids any more (especially the two Swedes).
As for Leandersson, well.. hrm.. um.. well, it was easy enough to get lost in those EYES when she was still only twelve. She ain't twelve no more, and it's just that much easier to get lost in those EYES! Whatever you do in whatever movie she's seen in next, don't look too deeply into those EYES or you'll be LOST! (yea, the rest of her isn't exactly repulsive, either...)
If a sequel for LTROI were to be made, I wonder, who could do it? Appearance aside, Leandersson's acting abilities rivaled those of Jodie Foster or Dakota Fanning at twelve.
Fais tomber les barrières entre nous qui sommes tous des frères
Re: Not-Smart Criticisms of LMI
1. It is different from LTROI. - It is different...this comes down to personal preference though. You either like the Subtle Nuanced Love Story of Alfredson's film, or you like the grittier darker somewhat pesismistic tale of LMI (or your the rare type who doesn't argue and likes both versions 
). For me, its different in overall tone, but at the same time remarkably similar to the film that came before it in structure. Which is a shame, I wanted Reeves to truly go back to the book and derive a new structure from it as opposed to taking what already exsisted and slightly changing it to his own liking. There are some differences that I actually like about LMI, I like the fact that they bought back in the element of Owen discovering sexuality...but at the same time, its undercut by the fact that its under developed in the film and really kind of goes nowhere by the end of the film. There is all these little ideas that are sprinkled on, but when the movie ends I feel like they were barely fleshed out.
It is different though...in tone it is remarkably different on the outset...but at the same time, I felt it was almost too dependant on the film that came before it.
2. It was made too soon. - I think it was made far too soon...personally speaking I think it was. It was so fresh at the time that for me, LMI was put in this weird spot where it was inevitably going to be compared so closely to the original film (granted it would always be compared no matter when it was made)...I could have done with a few years before they remade it, but at the same time, it is a buisness we're talking about. The remake came as solely a buisness move. They bought the rights, they wanted to make money of it, they wanted to spread it to a wider audience...which ironically they failed on some fronts.
3. LMI is American - Stupid Arguement for Stupid People...personally I couldn't care if it were a Japanese Version of LTROI (mmm Takashi Miike LTROI could be nice). I just wanted a good film that was going to do it justice. I didn't care where it was made, so long as it did it some justice and didn't completely f**k it up...then I was happy. Which to be fair to LMI, it didn't f**k it up completely. No matter how I feel about LMI, I can't say it screwed over the original film and screwed over the story drastically (as in making the kids teenagers and what not).
4. The American version is less obviously a love story. - All goes back to personal opinion. Personally I think LMI is a very pessimistic take on the story. I don't think it is a love story between Owen and Abby as it is more so a story of desperation and need. Its more so a story of what Owen and Abby can get from one another as opposed to being a love story. Once again, this is all personal opinion.
5. LMI is a carbon copy of LTROI. - Its not a carbon copy. Its not scene for scene...but its very close to being scene for scene in structure terms. LMI owes a lot to the film that came before it. I find it curious that even restructuring choices of LTROI were copied in LMI. The commentary track, Tomas mentions that the "I like you a lot" note originally came earlier in the film and was changed in the editing room (hence why Oskar's clothing is different from the very next scene with Lacke). I find it curious that LMI directly copies structuring like that. That's certainly not the way it took place in the book. Its not directly a scene for scene, shot for shot remake ala Psycho...but it does come extremely close to the original film's structuring. Its closer to the original film then it ever was to the books structuring.
6. Abby is a girl. - This really didn't surprise me one bit...this is the very first change I expected the remake to do. I knew that Abby would not be a castrated boy. I knew that was going to be changed. What I find awkward about LMI though is that they try to allude to that when really I'm thinking that there is nothing about Moretz that suggests a boy at all. What I find interesting about LMI is that somehow Reeves manages to amplify the one flaw I had with LTROI by including the peep scene but never going anywhere with it. As I mentioned above, Reeves brings back in the idea of Owen (Oskar) realizing sexuality but he doesn't quite go anywhere with it. He adds these little touches, but I feel they don't really add anything to the overall story. This was one flaw I had with Alfredson's film (in the fact that he didn't quite go there, he alludes to it but doesn't explore it), but yet in Reeves film I felt it was amplified by the idea that they're kind of exploring it through Owen and yet it doesn't really pan out and flesh itself out come the end of the film.
Its these changes that I found exciting and frustrating about LMI...he's trying to flesh things out but he can't quite go all the way with it in desperate need to meet the ambiguity of the original film.
). For me, its different in overall tone, but at the same time remarkably similar to the film that came before it in structure. Which is a shame, I wanted Reeves to truly go back to the book and derive a new structure from it as opposed to taking what already exsisted and slightly changing it to his own liking. There are some differences that I actually like about LMI, I like the fact that they bought back in the element of Owen discovering sexuality...but at the same time, its undercut by the fact that its under developed in the film and really kind of goes nowhere by the end of the film. There is all these little ideas that are sprinkled on, but when the movie ends I feel like they were barely fleshed out.It is different though...in tone it is remarkably different on the outset...but at the same time, I felt it was almost too dependant on the film that came before it.
2. It was made too soon. - I think it was made far too soon...personally speaking I think it was. It was so fresh at the time that for me, LMI was put in this weird spot where it was inevitably going to be compared so closely to the original film (granted it would always be compared no matter when it was made)...I could have done with a few years before they remade it, but at the same time, it is a buisness we're talking about. The remake came as solely a buisness move. They bought the rights, they wanted to make money of it, they wanted to spread it to a wider audience...which ironically they failed on some fronts.
3. LMI is American - Stupid Arguement for Stupid People...personally I couldn't care if it were a Japanese Version of LTROI (mmm Takashi Miike LTROI could be nice). I just wanted a good film that was going to do it justice. I didn't care where it was made, so long as it did it some justice and didn't completely f**k it up...then I was happy. Which to be fair to LMI, it didn't f**k it up completely. No matter how I feel about LMI, I can't say it screwed over the original film and screwed over the story drastically (as in making the kids teenagers and what not).
4. The American version is less obviously a love story. - All goes back to personal opinion. Personally I think LMI is a very pessimistic take on the story. I don't think it is a love story between Owen and Abby as it is more so a story of desperation and need. Its more so a story of what Owen and Abby can get from one another as opposed to being a love story. Once again, this is all personal opinion.
5. LMI is a carbon copy of LTROI. - Its not a carbon copy. Its not scene for scene...but its very close to being scene for scene in structure terms. LMI owes a lot to the film that came before it. I find it curious that even restructuring choices of LTROI were copied in LMI. The commentary track, Tomas mentions that the "I like you a lot" note originally came earlier in the film and was changed in the editing room (hence why Oskar's clothing is different from the very next scene with Lacke). I find it curious that LMI directly copies structuring like that. That's certainly not the way it took place in the book. Its not directly a scene for scene, shot for shot remake ala Psycho...but it does come extremely close to the original film's structuring. Its closer to the original film then it ever was to the books structuring.
6. Abby is a girl. - This really didn't surprise me one bit...this is the very first change I expected the remake to do. I knew that Abby would not be a castrated boy. I knew that was going to be changed. What I find awkward about LMI though is that they try to allude to that when really I'm thinking that there is nothing about Moretz that suggests a boy at all. What I find interesting about LMI is that somehow Reeves manages to amplify the one flaw I had with LTROI by including the peep scene but never going anywhere with it. As I mentioned above, Reeves brings back in the idea of Owen (Oskar) realizing sexuality but he doesn't quite go anywhere with it. He adds these little touches, but I feel they don't really add anything to the overall story. This was one flaw I had with Alfredson's film (in the fact that he didn't quite go there, he alludes to it but doesn't explore it), but yet in Reeves film I felt it was amplified by the idea that they're kind of exploring it through Owen and yet it doesn't really pan out and flesh itself out come the end of the film.
Its these changes that I found exciting and frustrating about LMI...he's trying to flesh things out but he can't quite go all the way with it in desperate need to meet the ambiguity of the original film.
Re: Not-Smart Criticisms of LMI
It would have been interesting/cool if remake had followed novel more than LTROImovie. For example Candy eating scene.I know that it is a MOVIE remake,but just sayin what I think would have been cool.DavidZahir wrote:
5. LMI is a carbon copy of LTROI.
Re: Not-Smart Criticisms of LMI
danielma wrote:
5. LMI is a carbon copy of LTROI. - Its not a carbon copy. Its not scene for scene...but its very close to being scene for scene in structure terms. LMI owes a lot to the film that came before it. I find it curious that even restructuring choices of LTROI were copied in LMI. The commentary track, Tomas mentions that the "I like you a lot" note originally came earlier in the film and was changed in the editing room (hence why Oskar's clothing is different from the very next scene with Lacke). I find it curious that LMI directly copies structuring like that. That's certainly not the way it took place in the book. Its not directly a scene for scene, shot for shot remake ala Psycho...but it does come extremely close to the original film's structuring. Its closer to the original film then it ever was to the books structuring.
Yes!That's what I'm talking about.The quote says it all.