The possibility of change

[gattoparde59]

I'd say "immaturity" is something of a recurrent theme in both the novel and the movie. A lot of the interaction that takes place between the China Restaurant Scooby Gang members could easily have taken place between grade school children.

Does Haken drink milk in the novel? I don't remember. In the movie, he's drinking it in what amounts to a bar; it might be a vague indication of "immaturity", but it could also be taken as a sign the poor man has a sour stomach.

For many people I know personally, there's milk on one side, whiskey on the other and most other beverages somewhere on a line describing something of a spectrum between the two; people who drink milk and fruit juices are "good", people who drink whiskey are "bad", and people who guzzle down grape Nehi have far less "visibly" compromised characters than folks who suck down sixpacks of beer. My coffee habit seems to put me somewhere in the middle.

It could be that Haken drinking milk in a bar is an alcoholic's way of saying "Hi, I'm Haken, and I've been dry for XX days."
In the movie he drinks milk when he is approached by Lacke. In the novel he is drinking distilled spirits. I forget, Lacke buys him a drink? He buys Lacke a drink?

My point with the milk in the movie is that Thomas Alfredson has a opinion on it, and I am assuming it has some significance. This man ain't right.

Thomas' interactions with other people are done with a plastic bag over his head, or with the cop in the ICU. Oh, and with Owen. That's about it.

Edit: I checked and in the novel he drinks whiskey and he drinks it "big." Btw, Morgan's joke about cancer makes more sense in the novel's context.
Lacke asks if they should invite Hakan to join their table.

Morgan glanced at the man, who had sunk together even more. "No, why? What's the use? His wife left him, the cat is dead and life is hell. I know it already.
"Maybe he'll offer to buy us a round."
"That's a different story. Then he's allowed to have cancer as well."

These lines in the movie makes even less sense with Hakan drinking milk. My apologies if anyone has figured this out already. I am just realizing how this all fits together. A forlorn man slams down a big dose of whiskey and attracts the attention of a freeloader. Lacke: what a guy!

[drakkar]

This is never spelled out, but Eli's dependence on helpers may come from a desire to limit infection. When Eli goes out chomping directly and skipping the middle man she runs the risk of something like Virginia, or Håken.

Yes, he did, but Eli was also quite self confident, so I just cannot see that he doubted his ability to "shut off" his victims. Rather, then, that he took the opportunity to have others doing the dirty work, like any child would.

[sauvin]

This is never spelled out, but Eli's dependence on helpers may come from a desire to limit infection. When Eli goes out chomping directly and skipping the middle man she runs the risk of something like Virginia, or Håken.

Yes, he did, but Eli was also quite self confident, so I just cannot see that he doubted his ability to "shut off" his victims. Rather, then, that he took the opportunity to have others doing the dirty work, like any child would.

This "shutting off", it occurs to me very late in the game, is a euphemism for "kill", isn't it? Her nosh victims have to be "turned off" or "switched off" (I forget the English translation's exact term) before the "infection" has a chance to reach the central nervous system or the brain, I think it was. This observation doesn't really have a whole lot to do with this thread of discussion, it just happens to be here that it happened.

If it really is a euphemism she uses in her internal monologues, it's indicative of a semideliberate distancing from the fact of what she does, and possibly the emotional consequences of it. If so, it's not surprising she'd find procurers a good thing to have around.

It makes me wonder, though, if maybe "infection" isn't also some kind of euphemism.

[gattoparde59]

This "shutting off", it occurs to me very late in the game, is a euphemism for "kill", isn't it? Her nosh victims have to be "turned off" or "switched off" (I forget the English translation's exact term) before the "infection" has a chance to reach the central nervous system or the brain, I think it was. This observation doesn't really have a whole lot to do with this thread of discussion, it just happens to be here that it happened.

Another question. Does Abby, or Eli change during the course of the story? Part of that would be a question of there being something there to change in the first place. I think this question has been discussed more in depth with Eli than with Oskar.

My impression with Abby is she remains pretty much the same throughout the story, but I could be wrong since I have not been able to get all the way through the film more than once, despite making several tries at it.

Yes, he did, but Eli was also quite self confident, so I just cannot see that he doubted his ability to "shut off" his victims. Rather, then, that he took the opportunity to have others doing the dirty work, like any child would.

In one passage, Eli does express doubts about his abilities to Hakan, just before he gets stuck with disposing of Jocke. That could also be childish spite and it has been argued that way.

[sauvin]

Another question. Does Abby, or Eli change during the course of the story? Part of that would be a question of there being something there to change in the first place. I think this question has been discussed more in depth with Eli than with Oskar.

My impression with Abby is she remains pretty much the same throughout the story, but I could be wrong since I have not been able to get all the way through the film more than once, despite making several tries at it.

I have a similar impression, even though I have no problem watching the silly thing twice in a single night, taking a few weeks off, and watching it two or three times again. I'm kinda stuck with idea of Thomas Cycles (tm), though, and so I wouldn't see much change. If she's been here before, done this before, gots lots of T-shirts, Owen is just another cat or dog to adopt and love as best she can while she can.

With Eli, I don't see as much change as others seem to, but maybe that's because I can't. She has two centuries of emotional momentum to "overcome" for any real change to take effect, and most of her existence is still dictated by her beast. I do see change, though, and it's probably more influenced by the novel than what's seen in the movie. She opens up, just a tad, and it's my prayer she'll find it within herself to open up and share more after they get off the train. All I'm really seeing in the movie is a good potential for emotionally meaningful change.

[drakkar]

I get the impression of Eli reconnecting to humanity, with the help from Oskar, more expressed in the book than in the film. In the film, the glass door scene and after thr bleeding scene made a strong impression on me.

In LMI I'm with those who see Thomas cycles.

@Gattoparde: Imo the weakness Eli claimed talking to Håkan was part of some barter game to make a reluctant helper do what his job. Elis actions showed that he was perfectly capable.

[sauvin]

I get the impression of Eli reconnecting to humanity, with the help from Oskar, more expressed in the book than in the film. In the film, the glass door scene and after thr bleeding scene made a strong impression on me.

In LMI I'm with those who see Thomas cycles.

@Gattoparde: Imo the weakness Eli claimed talking to Håkan was part of some barter game to make a reluctant helper do what his job. Elis actions showed that he was perfectly capable.

Perfectly capable of grabbing something to eat, yes. Jocke showed us this. Maybe what Eli was afraid of was doing something bone-headed and child-like while in the throes of... well, I hesitate to call it "passion". Leaving a body out in plain moonlight for any random passer-by to stumble on wasn't very clever if she wanted to stay in town a few more days. Maybe this is what she meant by "too weak": too weak to think clearly.

I agree that Eli showed strong signs of reconnecting with some sort of humanity, and I agree that it had to be with somebody like Oskar. She's accepted Oskar into her life so much that she took him away from his, and not for his capabilities as an immediate drop-in hit-the-ground-running replacement for Haken. It's hard to talk about what might be going through the mind of a mutilated two hundred year old child who lives on blood and has had to learn an abiding distrust of her neighbours, but Oskar apparently found enough promise to entrust his life to her (or had resigned himself finally and utterly to "que sera, sera").

Maybe much of the discussion of this "possibility of change" depends on what kinds of changes we're looking for, what kinds we're seeing, and even what kinds we're prepared to accept as plausible. Does Eli's whole life philosophy change dramatically in the space of three weeks? If she looks to the weeks and decades to come, does she see reason to hope for a healthier and more fulfilling existence? What, I wonder, has Eli actually learned during her time in Blackeberg?

With LTROI, it's clear that some kind of transformation has happened, but I'm inclined to think the greater bulk of change befell Oskar. Eli's life cannot change in any material way, but virtually nothing of Oskar's can remain.

My question: Does Matt Reeves see the story in the same way? When we first see Owen he is eating candy and singing the “Now and Later” jingle. Owen is this way "now" and the implication is he will be the same way "later." At the end of the film he is still singing the same song, “Now and Later,” we heard him sing at the beginning. Owen is the same person “now” as he was at the beginning of the story. Further the song implies there will be no serious changes in the future. Then there is the ominous example of Thomas. Thomas started out the same way as Owen to eventually come to a dead end with Abby.

One chilling possibility is that the "some" he's eating now or saving for later at the beginning of the movie just refers to the candy he's eating illicitly (spoiling his dinner), where the Owen on the train's "some" is a reflexion that he'll wind up helping Abby with hers. For Owen, no less than Oskar, nothing in life can remain the same, and the Thomas example does indeed suggest serious implications.

I have no idea how Reeves saw this story. He's certainly Americanised it with the music, the religion, the cop and the kids running around in cars, but the introduction of a Thomas is a game-changer. LTROI seems to be saying "I've never been here before, and it's scary, but it's nice!", where Reeves seems to be saying "Yea, it's nice, and it's hard to live without, but we've been here before, and done this before, and it's nice until it goes sour".

It's also almost as if Reeves (and most Americans) can't stand an open-ended ending unless it's a teaser for a possible sequel. With LTROI, we're left wondering how the kids are going to fetch up, and we've come up with a pile of different scenarios for them, but with that little photo strip, Reeves seems to be suggesting that things can only end up one way.