Let Me In

[Host of Seraphim]

About a year and a half ago, I watched Let the Right One In, a very sweet and odd Swedish vampire film. I really liked it. Imagine my surprise when, while strolling past the TV, I saw this:

Let Me In International trailer

(The commercial wasn't the same as that, but close enough. :P)

I was really shocked! I didn't know they were going to remake it in English.

Here's the trailer for the Swedish version, for comparison:

Let The Right One In - Official Trailer [HD]

Has anyone else seen the original film? If so, how do you feel about the remake? I'm afraid that it'll be "dumbed down," but I guess I'll give it a fair chance and see it (unless it gets overwhelmingly bad reviews-- then I won't waste my time :P). Also, I'm sort of wary about the actress that played Hit Girl to play the vampire. I guess I'm a little prejudiced against her because I disliked Kick-Ass, but it's also because I adored the actress's performance in Let the Right One In and I don't want to see her character fall flat in this version.

Also, have any of you read the novel it was based off of? I own it, but haven't got around to reading it yet.

[Katrina]

I saw it advertised and I'd like to see it though I've never seen the original.  It looks like it will be a good movie.

[Ryven]

I would like to see it only for comparison purposes.  I loved the first one, but the change in name makes it feel much more like a horror movie than what the original does.  Let the Right One In vs Let Me In  Yes, the original had some violence and blood, but it was so well done and focused more on the relationship between the two main characters.  They probably amped up the violence in the English version which would make me sad.

[Host of Seraphim]

Yeah, the commercial I saw looked so action-packed that I was surprised when I realized what it was. Hopefully the trailer's misleading. Meh :(

[DarklingAlice]

I just got back from the theater, so these are completely raw reactions:
I have to say that I think it was quite good. I have not seen the original film, although would like to if I can track it down, and I have the book on order.

This is not an action packed film at all. In fact I am betting that more than a few people will complain about it being too slow at the run time of 2 hours. But I think they needed at least most of that time, and they use their time quite well.

They focused a great deal on the relationship between the two protagonists, and I really have to say the kids were two of the best child actors I have seen in quite some time. While the gory scenes were quite intense, they were brief, and I don't think gratuitous (save perhaps the last one). Those scenes really fulfilled their purpose of showing both sides of our female lead, and really helped bring the elements of horror back to the vampire concept (something that I have quite missed from it lately). The scenes of violence are appropriately interspersed; they neither disrupt the focus on the childrens' interpersonal relationship, nor let us forget the nature of our female lead's character.

I also have to say they did a good job portraying the more mundane fears and troubles of childhood. Our male lead is really quite believable and the pains of his parent's marriage falling apart and his bullying at school come across authentically.

All in all, one of the better movies I have seen lately, and one of the only good American horror movies I can ever recall seeing. And by that I don't mean a scary movie. At no point was I scared, nor does the movie try to pull any of the cheap tricks or jump scares that overpopulate so called horror film. I mean that you feel for the characters, you care about them, and a roiling sense of discomfort grows as you realize that you are (in much the same way our male lead is) falling for a character who is genuinely a monster, and in a way hoping for the triumph of a relationship that is unhealthsome, deadly, and (when you think about it) at least a little pedophilic >_< It creates a sort of wrongness and a twisted sense of emotional investment in said wrongness that, to me, are really the hallmarks of horror.

So tl;dr version: I liked it. Think it is one of the better vampire films I have ever seen. Think it is one of the better (American) horror films I have ever seen (and I mean that in a sense it is not often used anymore <_<), and look forward to the arrival of my copy of the novel, and will try to see the Swedish version if I get a chance.

[Host of Seraphim]

Oh yay! I'm glad that it stayed true to the original version (well, from what I can remember-- it's been a while since I saw it). Some of my friends want to see it, so I think I'll go with them. I'm really happy to hear that it didn't stoop down to cheap scares as seen in so many horror movies. :D

[DarklingAlice]

And my copy of the book just arrived today! Haven't had much time to read it but what I have read so far seems well done. It is my understanding that it is substantially different than both movies in some ways and explores even darker themes. Hopefully I will have time to really delve into it in the upcoming week.

[Host of Seraphim]

I've heard that too. I've had my copy since last winter, but haven't got around to reading it yet. I wanted to read it for Halloween, but I have a bunch of Halloween-themed Batman graphic novels that I need to read first. I hate how I have to read things in a certain but totally arbitrary order. XD

[Aiden]

I saw it this weekend, the plot keept me hooked, it is not the typical shock and awe type scary movies. I enjoyed it, the relationship between the main characters made me think the story would go in multiple directions.

Not going to spoil anything so I will stop there, watch it!

[Florence]

I'm happy to hear this too, I haven't seen the original, but I've looked up a lot about it and have been meaning to see it for a while, and when I heard they were remaking it, I feared the worst too. I might try to see it sometime, but I'd still like to see the original first.

[DarklingAlice]

And chance has just landed a copy of the original in Mrs. Alice's hands. The wonders of working in a used books/movies/comics/games store. We won't have time to watch it until the weekend though.

The book is much darker. Not going to spoil anything, just fair warning.

[Bentley]

I have seen both the Swedish film and the American remake. Both are good, but I liked the American one more. Abby genuinely creeped me out while Eli didn't.

[little princess]

I like that movie.but when i saw the trailer for the American remake...kind of killed me a little.but I`m going to watch it before judging.who knows it might be good

[DarklingAlice]

Okay, finally got a chance to sit down this weekend and watch the Swedish film. And my verdict is that I prefer the American version.

The acting in both is top notch. I actually think I like Chloë Moretz more than Lina Leanderson, and Kåre Hedebrant more than Kodi Smit-McPhee; however, all four provide excellent performances.

American production values seem higher, the film is more crisp, etc. But that's generally par for the course, and I feel a little bad about holding that against the Swedish film. I guess my only legitimate technical complaint is that in the Swedish film there is more of a sense of the set. Things look more staged and the environments, with several exceptions, feel a little artificial.

The real deciding factor for me is the story. The Swedish film tries to introduce more characters from the novel, without really staying more true to the novel's narrative, or doing enough work to justify those characters. Specifically, I feel that the characters of Lacke, Virginia, and Gösta were extremely underdeveloped, especially for the role they played. As I read the novel I find them to be much more believable and sympathetic characters, but the film just presents them in a disjointed fashion and leaves me very confused about their identities and motivations. I find this particularly crippling with Lacke and Virginia who do have such interesting roles in the story, yet we learn almost nothing about in the film. The American film circumvents this by relegating them to minor characters and giving Lacke's role to the police detective (who needs no motivation other than his job to look into the murders, a weak motivation? Yes. But it beats completely glossing over the rationale behind Lacke's actions, relationship to Virginia, and response to Jocke's murder in the Swedish film).

Also I think Håkan is underdeveloped in both films (which I suppose is a necessary evil since so much of his identity and history are given in flashback in the novel). However, while the Swedish film leaves him motivationless (apparently not wanting to bring in and explain his pedophilia) the American film changes his motivation and allows us to infer a succinct (and really skillfully introduced) explanation for his actions. While I am generally for staying true to source material, I still enjoy the presence of that explanation other than the complete absence of one in the Swedish film.

I also do not appreciate the Swedish film's blink and you'll miss it introduction of Eli's, shall we say for the sake of not spoiling anything, physical abnormalities. I would rather omit it entirely than have something like that sprung on me with no explanation or role in the story. Once again it is taking the book to give me an appreciation of the meaning behind that story element.

In summation: When watching the Swedish film I feel like an observer being given somewhat disjointed views. It leads to a feeling of authenticity. There is something voyeuristic about it. But at the same time it often leads to confusion and a lack of sympathy with the characters. Further it gives the impression that the director wants you to have already read the book before seeing it, as he is astonishingly lax in developing multiple character and plot elements. The American one feels more like being told a story (which loses some of the visceral impact) and fewer questions are left when the narrative is done (other than Eli/Abby's past which neither film explores).

The end result is debatable but I know I caught myself checking the time more during the Swedish film. Both have a similar run-time and I know some critics are complaining about that. I think the American film earns and fills its 2 hours. I am not sure that the Swedish film does so (paradoxically it seems to both earn less and need more <_<). And I found that I  walked away less disturbed from the Swedish film than I did from the American, which I think should really kind of be the rule of thumb about this sort of thing.

Although for sheer disturbance power the book is a must. I am 2/3 through and find it incredibly interesting and engaging.

They are both fine movies and are definitely going into my collection, I just think that the American one is a slight bit better in its handling of the story (especially if you are not going to read the book beforehand).