My Take on LMI: Silence Speaks Louder

For discussion of Matt Reeve's Film Let Me In

Moderator: LMI Moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
seigezunt
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 3:47 pm
Location: Massachusetts

My Take on LMI: Silence Speaks Louder

Post by seigezunt » Wed Jun 10, 2015 4:42 pm

I'm not seeing a general review thread, so I hope this is okay to leave this here. Please move if you feel it needs to be, admin(s).

I finally had a chance to view "Let Me In" all the way through, and I think my conclusion is that, while it is an alright film in its own right, I think it is an inferior work to both Let the Right One In and the source novel.

While it is much better than other attempts to remake-the-subtitles-away, I think that if this had been the first of the three that I had seen/read, I doubt I would have become infected and sought out the other two.

I suspect it might have served the director better to ignore the Swedish film altogether (if possible) and simply tried to adapt the novel. I think Let Me In is closer to the novel in terms of perverse creepiness, and if the director was intending to make it more a pure horror film, he could have used elements from the novel not used in the earlier film. Such as Zombie Hakan, and the darker characterization of Eli.

Which leads to where I think Let Me In fails with me. It tries to reproduce scenes from the first film, almost shot-for-shot and line-by-line. But in the execution, he commits the sin that I see characteristic of many American films: the need to strike out ambiguity and nuance, the need to explain everything.

In particular, he ruins the "would you still like me if I wasn't a girl" and the "will you be my girlfriend" scenes. I'm guessing he wants to completely avoid the back story that Eli was originally male, and he adds dialogue that basically tries to minimize those lines from the original movie. I can't remember exactly, but it was something to the effect of, "you're just kidding." Because of course an American boy would never be caught admitting he loved someone who might not be a girl. *sigh*

Which is sad. For me, the "would you still like me" scene in LTROI was the part where I started to think, "hey, this is going to be very different," and the "will you be my girlfriend" scene was exactly where my heart was trapped. The look that Lena gives is so poignant, so loaded with pain/affection, that I just was rooting for Eli from that point on.

It appears to me that the young actors in the remake must have watched or been coached on the original, because some of their delivery fairly mimics the original, down to facial expressions and gestures. But I think the remake ultimately lacks the romantic element, partly because of the handling of the gender issue, partly because the "father/helper" character is clearly another Owen, all grown up. So it has a lot of what is going on in the original, but I feel it has an empty center. The young actors feel like actors, models even, whereas the kids in the Swedish version feel like kids. They remind me of kids I know, knew, and have been.

I think also the change of the setting is distracting. One thing that suckered me into the romance/darkness of the original was the oppressive, depressive bleakness of the Swedish setting. I don't get a sense of this Los Alamos. I think the housing development that Owen lives in is a good recreation and Americanization of the original, and had a very Stephen King feel in its ordinariness. But Blackeberg (sp?) was just soooo bleak that it brings the loneliness of the leads to the front of the story.

I think Let Me In fails for trying to be too much like the original, but then diverting in very important details. I understand that the Hakan of the novel would be as hard a sell to American audiences as it as for the Swedish production, but by trying to explain too much, it makes me feel that the director missed the point (or at least a major point) of the original. The question of "is the vampire just seeking another helper" was admittedly ambiguous in the original (enough so that Lindqvist would go on to address that question in his sequel story, apparently), but the ambiguity was the strength of the original. What will happen? What was Eli's origin? Etc. The original movie's silences and unanswered questions were a plus, and the attempts to remove ambiguity hurt the remake IMO.

Also: I wasn't put off by Abby's "vampire" look, and I actually liked the more violent pool scene, though not preferred. But I felt a little robbed that we don't see her, and only Owen's reaction. I also thought it was wimpy to recreate the "boy takes a peek at her dressing" scene without the disturbing image of what he saw. Again, yeah, Americans would have gone bananas probably, but that WTF moment was important, even though I have to admit that I had no clue what was going on there until I read the book.

Oh, LMI didn't have the cats. So there's a plus.
"She can fly, she has amazing and horrifying powers, she isn’t exactly a boy or a girl, she can’t come inside unless she’s invited ... and she loves him. That’s enough."

--Andrew O'Hehir, Salon.com


My LTROI Pinterest Board

User avatar
dongregg
Posts: 3937
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:58 pm
Location: Atlanta
Contact:

Re: My Take on LMI: Silence Speaks Louder

Post by dongregg » Wed Jun 10, 2015 5:09 pm

Thank you for this thorough, thoughtful, and well-balanced review. My own opinion of any remake of LTROI (sight unseen) is not balanced. It is unhinged. But I read somewhere that "fan" comes from "fanatic," so...

You've written a review worthy of the name -- nuanced, detailed, and informative. If I were to get going, "rant" would probably better apply to what I would say. :D

Anyway, kudos. Well done.
“For drama to deepen, we must see the loneliness of the monster and the cunning of the innocent.”

User avatar
Jameron
Posts: 2728
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 10:09 pm
Location: Stoke on Trent, UK

Re: My Take on LMI: Silence Speaks Louder

Post by Jameron » Wed Jun 10, 2015 7:57 pm

Hey, nice review.

I'd like to add my two penneth if that's okay with you?

Your point about the Director taking too much from the first film and replicating it "shot for shot" is somewhat unfair on Reeves. Hammer bought the rights to remake the film, not re-adapt the novel. Remaking a film is a much shorter process than a new novel adaptation, and cheaper too. Reeves had a remit, and that remit was to remake the film, his hands were tied. I am with you wholeheartedly that Let Me In would have likely been many times better than it is if we had had a brand new adaptation of the novel from Reeves, but without Reeves the remake could have been a lot worse.

The scenes that were reproduced "almost shot-for-shot and line-by-line" were the core scenes that involved the two leads. In Tomas' film those scenes are so effective and efficient that I don't see how they could possibly be restructured without losing their strength and meaning. Reeves did the only thing he could, he kept the scenes but disguised them so as not to lose their power, After all Let Me In can't wander too far from the original film as they were using Tomas' story structure. Key scenes in the original are also key scenes in the remake.

As for Abby's gender, yes, I think Reeves made a conscious decision to whitewash that touchy subject. Although there are plenty of gay protagonists in American productions, I can't think of that many in the "horror" genre. I think it might be a genre issue rather than an American issue. I know Oskar isn't "gay", but we're talking audience reaction here.

I understand that Chloe and Kodi were not allowed to watch the original film, or read the book, before or during filming, as they are playing fundamentally different characters and it would just muddy the waters.

Abby is a girl, there is no "WTF moment" other than Owen seeing female genitalia. That being the case, one has to wonder exactly why Reeves chose to leave that scene in the film, it doesn't seem to serve any purpose other than restating Owen's immaturity. Early on we see Owen spying on his neighbours and getting a view of Virginia's boob, this was a lonely boy's voyeurism. Much later on in the film we see Owen doing the same thing, only this time it is to someone he is supposed to care deeply for. Has he had no character development in the film up to this point? It seems a bit odd to me that Reeves left that scene in.

No, there are no CGI cats in Let Me In. However, there is a cop that makes no sense. Swings and roundabouts.

.
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli’s eyes. And what he saw was … himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."

User avatar
JToede
Posts: 869
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:37 am
Location: Sage WY

Re: My Take on LMI: Silence Speaks Louder

Post by JToede » Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:08 am

seigezunt wrote: The young actors feel like actors, models even, whereas the kids in the Swedish version feel like kids. They remind me of kids I know, knew, and have been.
I think that's Hollywood for you, everything has to be "pretty" and "flashy", I saw a picture of Chloe Moretz recently and I didn't recognizer her until I read the caption. While you see a picture of Lina you can still recognize her as Lina
seigezunt wrote:Also: I wasn't put off by Abby's "vampire" look, and I actually liked the more violent pool scene.
I think that's due to American cinema/culture, we more comfortable with blood gore and violence than sex, sexuality and nudity, while European cinema/culture it's reversed.
seigezunt wrote:I also thought it was wimpy to recreate the "boy takes a peek at her dressing" scene without the disturbing image of what he saw. Again, yeah, Americans would have gone bananas probably, but that WTF moment was important, even though I have to admit that I had no clue what was going on there until I read the book.
Again, differences between American and European views.
seigezunt wrote:But I felt a little robbed that we don't see her, and only Owen's reaction.
AMEN!!! In LMI that scene left me hanging, in the original there is closure to it. That is my biggest gripe with LMI.
That's my 2 cents/2 öre /2 pence /2 bits
Veni, Vidi, volo in domum redire.

User avatar
a_contemplative_life
Moderator
Posts: 5896
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 2:06 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: My Take on LMI: Silence Speaks Louder

Post by a_contemplative_life » Thu Jun 11, 2015 2:31 am

Here were my thoughts on LMI back in 2010...FWIW...

http://www.let-the-right-one-in.com/for ... loe#p30229
Image

User avatar
seigezunt
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 3:47 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: My Take on LMI: Silence Speaks Louder

Post by seigezunt » Thu Jun 11, 2015 3:25 pm

Jameron wrote:Hey, nice review.

I'd like to add my two penneth if that's okay with you?
Of course.
Jameron wrote:Your point about the Director taking too much from the first film and replicating it "shot for shot" is somewhat unfair on Reeves. Hammer bought the rights to remake the film, not re-adapt the novel. Remaking a film is a much shorter process than a new novel adaptation, and cheaper too. Reeves had a remit, and that remit was to remake the film, his hands were tied. I am with you wholeheartedly that Let Me In would have likely been many times better than it is if we had had a brand new adaptation of the novel from Reeves, but without Reeves the remake could have been a lot worse.
Thank you for sharing that. I am regrettably ignorant about what led up to the production of LMI, and knowing this now makes some of the odd inconsistencies a little more understandable.
Jameron wrote:As for Abby's gender, yes, I think Reeves made a conscious decision to whitewash that touchy subject. Although there are plenty of gay protagonists in American productions, I can't think of that many in the "horror" genre. I think it might be a genre issue rather than an American issue. I know Oskar isn't "gay", but we're talking audience reaction here.
I think you are spot-on here. This may be one reason why I adore LTROI: I selected it on Netflix on Halloween, expecting to wince my way through a horror movie. What I got instead was an art movie with a big heart, that happens to involve vampires. At the time I was expecting something much grosser and edgier. At that time I had only read a tiny bit of the book, and had abandoned it somewhere around the first scene involving the Pissball.
Jameron wrote:I understand that Chloe and Kodi were not allowed to watch the original film, or read the book, before or during filming, as they are playing fundamentally different characters and it would just muddy the waters.
I find this really surprising, and a credit, I guess, to the director, because I observed much in the surface content of their performances that aped the original cast. But I believe you.
Jameron wrote:Abby is a girl, there is no "WTF moment" other than Owen seeing female genitalia. That being the case, one has to wonder exactly why Reeves chose to leave that scene in the film, it doesn't seem to serve any purpose other than restating Owen's immaturity. Early on we see Owen spying on his neighbours and getting a view of Virginia's boob, this was a lonely boy's voyeurism. Much later on in the film we see Owen doing the same thing, only this time it is to someone he is supposed to care deeply for. Has he had no character development in the film up to this point? It seems a bit odd to me that Reeves left that scene in.
Not to mention that Abby doing the "girly twirl" in Owen's mother's dress makes no sense in the different context of LMI.
Jameron wrote:No, there are no CGI cats in Let Me In. However, there is a cop that makes no sense. Swings and roundabouts.

.
LOL. Yeah, now after reading some other reviews here, I'm grasping how inadequate the cop was, and how clumsy it was to use him as a replacement for Lacke in the bathtub scene.

I can't find the review now, but someone also made a good point in that Reeves, in attempting to remake an art film as a horror film, ultimately failed because he just ended up making a horror film with arty touches that alienated viewers of both genres.

Still, I might watch it again, if only for the source story and my worries that I might burn out if I just keep watching LTROI as much as I have. I've commented elsewhere that viewing LMI has softened my fears about the A&E series, because watching LMI left me concluding that any other attempt after LTROI will inevitably fall short, and it's pointless to worry about the flaws, and better to celebrate that it may simply lead more people to the original novel and film. Yes, there's the small risk that fans of LMI or the series will be bored by the original, but at least they are being exposed to the infection.
"She can fly, she has amazing and horrifying powers, she isn’t exactly a boy or a girl, she can’t come inside unless she’s invited ... and she loves him. That’s enough."

--Andrew O'Hehir, Salon.com


My LTROI Pinterest Board

User avatar
Marok
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: My Take on LMI: Silence Speaks Louder

Post by Marok » Tue Jun 16, 2015 9:51 am

Nice review. Thanks!

Also thanks to Jameron for clearing up some details about the production of LMI. Wasn’t aware of it.
I think a more horror-focused adaption of the novel, not just a remake of the film, with the whole Håkan subplot included among others, would’ve been interesting. It would’ve at least attracted my attention.

Anyway, in my case LMI managed to lead me to LTROI. I liked it, made me do a little detour to imdb to get a glimpse on some trivia and ultimately I put the source material "LTROI" onto my watch list just out of curiosity. A&E’s series might indeed be able to achieve something similar. Or, if it happens to be just extremely bad, it might also repel people from anything related to it altogether. Hopefully not. We’ll have to wait and see. :)

User avatar
IDreamtIWasABee
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 12:38 am

Re: My Take on LMI: Silence Speaks Louder

Post by IDreamtIWasABee » Wed Jul 01, 2015 10:20 pm

seigezunt wrote: In particular, he ruins the "would you still like me if I wasn't a girl" and the "will you be my girlfriend" scenes.
Those are two of the most charming scenes in LMI (particularly the one where he hugs her after she succumbs to not!bulimia).
I'm guessing he wants to completely avoid the back story that Eli was originally male
The original film completely avoided Eli's back story, too. Cryptic murmurings about "I'm not a girl, I'm nothing" are common to both films, and the crotch shot cop-out looks like hieroglyphic physiognomy for all the sense it makes. Oskar never wrestles with the fact that he's fallen for a boy.
Because of course an American boy would never be caught admitting he loved someone who might not be a girl. *sigh*
The only thing an American boy would not be caught doing is misunderstanding the intentions of a naked American girl climbing through his window to get in bed with him.
Ursula was played by a boy in 1961. One day, Eli.

User avatar
CyberGhostface
Posts: 890
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 7:43 am

Re: My Take on LMI: Silence Speaks Louder

Post by CyberGhostface » Sat Aug 01, 2015 12:53 am

IDreamtIWasABee wrote:The original film completely avoided Eli's back story, too. Cryptic murmurings about "I'm not a girl, I'm nothing" are common to both films, and the crotch shot cop-out looks like hieroglyphic physiognomy for all the sense it makes. Oskar never wrestles with the fact that he's fallen for a boy.
It didn't completely avoid it if they showed the castration scar.
No banaaaanas?

User avatar
Mikallein
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2015 2:02 am
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: My Take on LMI: Silence Speaks Louder

Post by Mikallein » Sat Aug 01, 2015 3:27 am

Sigh....I'm very torn.

I originally saw LTROI first, and watched LMI the next night.

I went in skeptical as I am with all remakes or adaptations. I fully expected it to be crap, to go way off track of the original movie and ruin everything. But to my surprise it was fairly true to the original at least as far as recreating the shots as was mentioned.

Seeing as so many of my beloved franchises pulled through the mud, it left a good impression on me that this one did not. Still had the same basic story with the same basic events. (basically ;) )

I will be the first to agree with the many downfalls of LMI. However for me it's good outweighs it's bad.

It also may have something to do with the way I look at LMI. I veiw it as similar but differint to LTROI. Almost like it's a parallel universe. "constants and variables" for any Bioshock infinite fans out there. The constance being a young boy is being bullied and befriends a feminine child seemingly his own age who just happens to be a vampire. And the variables don't ruin it for me, Infact from my first viewing they actually added to it somewhat as I was not 100% sure what was going to happen, and that was ok. As long as the core, the constance of this story about a boy and his dark angle STAYED the core, the variables didint bother me.

Abby is actually a girl? A variable, didint bother me. ( correct me if I'm wrong but I thought I remember reading somewhere that JAL did not think of Eli being a castrated boy until after he started writing the story as Eli as a girl. The core of the story still works either way imo)

Owen's mom is the drunk instead of his dad? Again a variable, didint bother me. The core of Owen's relationship with his parents is the same as Oskar's, strained to the point were he would run away if he had a good enough reason.

Random cop guy instead of Lacke? More of a meh but ultimately didint bother me to much. I did enjoy having somewhat of a police investigation into what was happening similar to the book but was ultimately scrapped for the original film.

Owen and Abby being fundamentally different characters to their Swedish counterparts? Again it didint bother me, even though maybe it should have. Once I started viewing LMI as an alternative universe type thing the fact that a similar story was happening to different characters seemed almost natural.

I could go on but I don't want to ramble. (Too late)

To summarize: I'm glad this movie exists. I enjoy it when I watch it and am able to over look it's short comings and see a (fairly) faithfull re telling of the story that we all love.

For a while I loved them both equally, but now I'm ready to admit that LTROI is the superior movie. But that doesn't mean we have to push LMI away. It's still my second favorite vampire flick and in my top five favorite movies of all time list. And I think we can all agree it could have been a hell of a lot worse of a remake.

*shudders at the thought of Abby sparkling in the sunlight*

At the very least it introduced a lot more people to the original who might have otherwise never have heard of it.

I guess in closing I will say this: LMI is not LTROI, but that's OK, I forgive it. Seeing as how I went in expecting to have my new favorite movie torn to shreds by Hollywood but instead found a decent retelling of the story with some variables thrown in left an impression on me. At least the director TRIED instead of phoning it in like so many others would have to get a quick pay check.

Ps: I actually liked the cat scene and was sad to see it go, a long with many of the other scenes mentioned. The pool scene when we don't get to see Abby's reaction to Owen's face always grinds me gears a bit, lol.
Image

Post Reply

Return to “Let Me In”