Let Me InWhile I normally try and maintain an open mind about new films, beyond the common 'I know what I like' biases that every critic or casual moviegoer goes in with (whether or not they admit to it... but that's another topic), this is a special case. I'm a "No" before watching the trailer given that the whole thing reminds me of nothing more than those knockoff dresses meant to replicate a popular Oscar gown. Only in this case, it makes no sense to buy the knockoff because it's not any cheaper than the great original. In fact, it's more expensive since ticket prices are always going up.
But before I even watched the trailer I must admit unoriginal but sincere confusion as to why the aesthetically beautiful teaser poster is constructed of blood and ice. One of the most chilling aspects (hahaha) of the original film was its wintry Scandinavian setting. The new film supposedly relocates the movie to New Mexico but both the poster and the trailer suggest we're still in wintry Scandinavia. Now, I've personally only been to New Mexico once, for cheesy 'Drive around the four corners!' tourist reasons so my knowledge is extremely untrustworthy... but it didn't strike me as a wintry place at all. And though I'm no meteorological expert I have the vague perception that it's not very cold in the Southwest even in the winter. Do lakes even freeze over in the winter?
Whatever. I'll shut up. It's just a poster. Here's the trailer.
Yes Here's the one thing I'm genuinely curious about. What's the cinematography by Greig Fraser going to be like over the course of the whole film? His work on Bright Star was just exceptional. I could see forgiving this film's existence if it made people notice (retroactively) how amazing his work on Bright Star was since it won virtually no awards.
No I can answer that in five words "Let the Right One In" or I could use just two "Chloe Moretz".
Maybe So A trailer has finally stumped me. I have no mixed feelings about this movie. I object to its very existence as well as all the credit it will get as "original" or "visionary" or whatever adjective the press notes will supply people should it happen to win good reviews whilst copying a superior film.
BlaA--AA--aaaARRrrrggh. Sorry.
Are you a yes, no or maybe so?
I won't judge you. I'm still too busy judging the film I haven't seen.
*
Posts
41 comments:
Oh...um...damn. Conflicted.
I swear, if they edit out the violence to make it more acsessible to all the Americans who are used to Twilight, I might have to hunt the cast and crew down one by one ala Kill Bill.
I like the talent they've brought on board, and it does look like they can really capture the mood of the original. I have two real problems with the trailer though:
1) Looks like a scene for scene remake. Which begs the question, why does it even need to exist?
2) All the thumping, and over the top tension building, in the trailer. The original was a quiet, mood film. This trailers makes it look more like a dark horror.
test. i'm not sure comments are working today? argh.
I wasn't the hugest fan of the original so I'm even less keen.
Chloe Moretz, however, looks so badly cast!
I'm going into this one with an open mind. Kodi Smitt-McPhee really impressed me in "The Road", I thought "Cloverfield" was good so I have no problem with the director, and the first thing I thought after watching "Let The Right One In" was "It's good, but..." so there was definite room for improvement.
It wasn't a perfect film by any means, and hopefully this remake will make the requisite changes that will, yes make it less subtle and more mainstream (like more detail on the police investigation into the murders, and the vigilante-ism(?) of the townspeople) but improve on the original.
I think everyone who has a problem with this film are just doing it on principal, ignoring the fact that sometimes a remake isn't a bad idea.
Out with anger - In with love
I've been pissed off about this film's existence for months now, but now that I've seen the trailer, honestly...I admit that I want to see it. It looks like it could be that rare English-language remake that actually works, despite what it owes to the original. Will it top the original? Doubt it. Can it succeed as a decent or even good film anyway? It very well could. Along with Fraser's cinematography (nice), it's being scored by Giacchino, which should be interesting, seeing as this is a bit dark in terms of subject matter for him to tackle.
No, not for me. The trailer left me indifferent and pardon the pun - cold.
This is off topic, but just an fyi that today, July 6th, is the Dalai Lama's birthday. To celebrate the event, why not write up a post about Buddhism and/or Tibet in films? Two movies that immediately spring to mind are "Kundun" and "Seven Years in Tibet."
UGH. so many comment issues right now. i guess you have to speak anonymously or do name/url?
blinking -- great idea but alas i have not such films or knowledge in my possession.
I feel like the trailer for the remake is much more overt than the original film. It looks like a horror film, it sounds like a horror film, blah blah blah. The subtlety of the horror in the first half of the original film was part of what I loved about it.
I'm not expressing myself very well right now. Too early. :-)
You cannot go by the trailer of most films in order to know what they're going to be .... meaning good or bad or just plain different. This tack is getting ridiculous. Films are often misrepresented completely in trailers -- to draw the most viewers, you know. Still, I have qualms about a film that is very likely (due to our country's ongoing tendencies to see certain issues as "icky") to throw out it's most interesting plot point.
I LOVE that Chloe Moretz is a "no" for you. So glad I'm not the only one severely aggravated by her.
I love that Chloe Moretz is a "no" for you. So glad I'm not the only one severely aggravated by her.
(Guy Lodge, but trying the anonymous option)
I love that Chloe Moretz is a "no" for you. So glad I'm not the only one severely aggravated by her.
I'm a firm NO to the idea that they had to do this remake. But I'm keeping a general open mind now since they HAVE made it already. Hopefully those who will watch this will check out Let the Right One In.
I loved LTROI for the silence, the plainness, the simpleness. I'm not sure that big budget effects and a Mahler-esqe orchestration will improve upon the original (or even compete with the original), although the fact that it's in English and set in America will make the movie more accessible to many Americans who wouldn't otherwise be caught dead (or undead) "reading" a movie.
No no no. No no no no NO!
i believe like the intellectuals would here: if the art of the original is wasted of the swine of the world then let them have their campy slasher flick remake. those of us who are true fans of foreign films will say neigh. however there are things that confuse me about the remake such as will we still have the beautifully played vampire legendry of the first (cats fear, invitation or hemorrhaging blood,and the connection to someone due to a personal bond) will we still find out that his father is gay what will the addition of the "original vampire" mean for the story.
The only thing that i can still say is people who enjoy great stories being shat upon will truly enjoy this one. i might see it when it comes to dvd or if someone pays my way but i am not willing to go out of my way to see this one.
No. No! No!! Noooooooo!!!!! What I saw of the original (1/2) stated a dreamy yet also threatening snowy landscape. I understand there's a taste for "horror" films, but isn't it scarier when it isn't broadcast as obviously as this. (Of course, American horror has become a trash ground, what with torture porn ruling the roost. Using the sight of intestines and people killed by razor wire should be end points. Torture porn makes those the end all and be all of fear. If you look at Eraserhead, it used 1 creepy puppet baby for 1/2 the scares. Not it being hit, damaged or tortured. Just the presence of a monstrous baby, insinuated to be born because of artificial insemination, not sex.)
It definitely snows in New Mexico. And Flagstaff and other "northern" southwestern cities.
It definitely snows in New Mexico. And Flagstaff, Salt Lake City... even Vegas on the rare occasion.
anon -- thanks for letting me know. But do rivers ice over. I mean is it really WINTRY like it looks?
I don't want to see this because the original was so fantastic but I'm sure I will eventually. Even the title irks me. It's like it's telling you the film will be much more in your face than Let the Right One In. LTROI was great because of it's quietness and understatedness, the remake seems like it's going in exactly the opposite direction. Also, it does ice quite a bit in the south. I'm from Oklahoma and we get more ice than snow every winter.
I'm fine with remakes, even ones of recent, awesome foreign films. It's been a long tradition in Hollywood, it really has, so I accept it. So I was a "yes" until I saw the trailer. Really, it looks shot-for-shot, only using a warmer color palette. And that's just lazy. I understand the fear of tampering with a revered film, but didn't they already cross that bridge when they decided to remake it anyway? So now it's a "maybe so".
But Richard Jenkins always has me leaning to a yes.
Los Alamos has an elevation of 7320 feet per Wikipedia. That's over a mile up. They definitely get snow.
NO.NO.NO.NO.NOOOOOO
I don't care how beautiful the cinematography looks or how it looks like they stayed faithful to the original's tone and themes, it's going to be terrible. I just think that having it be tailor-made for American audiences will suck out everything that made the original so dark and quirky. Many of my favorite moments will be butchered, that's for sure.
I'm with Walter. I've accepted the inevitability of remakes. But why make it so similar to the original? Why not take the opportunity to put a different spin on it?
The remake could be a very good film indeed. But even if it is, if I feel like I've seen it already I'll probably catch something else that weekend.
I'm so irritated when it comes to this and the Spider-Man remake. Both of them are just totally unnecessary. The orginal LTROI was dark, disturbing but surprisingly sweet and touching with a beautiful score. I would not be surprised if this new version just went for dark and disturbing.
@jbaker475 - it tickles me endlessly to see you have the Nicole pic i made as your display picture. :)
Trailer looks great, IMO, but I agree there really is no reason for this film to be made. Also, why "NO Chloe Moretz"?
It's lazy idea, ok, but why people are so crazy about it? It's not a first.
You know, try to count how many Film Bitch nominations The Departed got...
Hmm. I`mma go with maybe so. But much as I love the original, I can never get too up in arms about remakes. I`m trying to see this as a positive thing - maybe it`ll get more people interested in seeing Let the Right One In, and I think that`s worth a bad remake.
Except those people didn't "Van Sant's Psycho" it. In fact, The Departed fused elements from multiple movies into one, I feel, incohesive, over plotted, plot holed and poorly characterised package. In a Bunuel I can stand incoherency and going with the flow. In a thriller? Mr. Scorsese will have to answer to critics soon for the giant mess this was. A reverse Get Carter, if you will. (Only Mark Wahlberg comes out of that production unscathed.)
Besides, isn't Let the Right One In based on a novel, unlike, say Infernal Affairs? I am not assuming this, but it is possible the American went off the novel and not the Swedish film.
BTW, I enjoyed The Departed, so I have no real qualms with remakes in general. And I have even less of a problem if both are based on a different source.
NO, NO, NO and NO. The original is so wonderful I don't want anything to spoil my memory of it.
I don't see why it should even be made, after so little time. The original is such a moving, hauting, powerful film that I dont see why anyone would rather watch this one.
And I dont think they could capture the mood and the atmosphere of the original.
cal -- i don't remember how many nominations the Departed got. Not a ton if i recall but that was a good remake. And I had seen the original before it was made. The difference being I suppose that I don't think Infernal Affairs was a "great" movie per se. Certainly a good one though.
and i don't totally object to remakes if they try something different with them. But this one just makes me straight up angry.
is that hypocritical? Mmmmm... maybe a little but we all have our pet aggravations.
I don’t have a problem with this remake…after all Hollywood has been remaking foreign films for years. My only concern is that they will tone it down.
I may go and see this but I don’t feel its fair to judge a film by its trailer…wait for the film to come out first.
When I first heard that the remake would be set in New Mexico I didn't think they would keep the snow covered landscape of the original. Don't really know why they have chosed to do that.
Now I don't know which town in New Mexico it's supposed to take place, but I have family in Los Alamos and they always have much, much more snow during the winter than we have here in Denmark*. And there's definitely ice covered ponds and creeks.
(* we're not as lucky regarding snow as the most of Scandinavia. The winter 2009/10 was wonderful though :D ).
I'm not against Chloe Moretz. I don't know what everyone has against her, exactly. She's got great screen presence, if you ask me. Is she just too cute or something? I though she was okay in 500 Days of Summer and didn't see Kickass so can't say about that one. Is it just uncool to like her or something -- if so, dumb reason.
What's your problem with Chloe Moretz? Did I read that correctly? She was amazing in "Kick-Ass", and down the road, we could be looking at Jodie Foster-like early talent. I want to see what she does with this role. The trailer's solid. I'm not so beholden to the original that I won't give this film a proper try. I also want to see how they handle the violence quotient, if they go subtle like the original or overt like the "Cloverfield" branding would have us believe (there's a reason why that labeling is accompanying the posters). But I'm still interested in seeing this. The trailer was a lot of what I expected.
That's one SHITTY trailer. So desperate to be "action packed" and "thrilling".
Post a Comment