This American remake of the terrific Swedish film "Let the right one in" (Låt den rätte komma in) seems to have come out with undue haste perhaps...I reviewed the original (subtitled) movie here on 22 April 2009. When I heard that there was to be a US remake, I was sure I would ignore it, as the original was in no way flawed. What changed my mind? Two things: 1) Chloë Moretz. She was inspiring in the comic book themed movie "Kick-Ass". 2) "At the movies" mentioned that the remake was pretty close to the original. Personally I still find the original the gold standard for this film, so would encourage people to see that on a big screen before you see the remake.
The story is identical to the original...a troubled young teenage boy (about 13 years old) doesn't fit in at his high-school. Then a similarly aged teenage girl moves to his town and to a flat right next door to him. She seems strange too. They form an unlikely relationship...which seems to perhaps offer up salvation to both of them. However, some brutal murders soon start occurring in the small, isolated town they live in. The local policeman fears that a Satanic cult or some such is at work in the town and he tries to find it.
Comparing the two movies - since the original is still fresh in my memory, I had a check list watching the remake...seeing that all the key scenes for me were in the new movie. They pretty much were. Maybe that was a sort of distraction...ticking boxes as I watched the movie. Maybe a couple of extra scenes have been added in the US versions. David Stratton complained about one scene not being replicated in the remake...where the young girl is naked. In some ways this is better, I think. I'll go into that later.
The original let me in more. With the remake, I felt a bit of a distance to the story. Kodi Smit-McPhee as the young boy Owen is terrific in this movie. He brings a subtle understanding to the character. For instance, I like the way he casually taunts Chloë Moretz' Abby about coming inside his house. Chloë is very good too, but maybe her ticking all the boxes as far as the physicality of her character goes left Abby with a lot less soul. Both convey a nice sense of alienation from society...sort of like mall rats.
I suppose I was hoping that the remake would convey a very European sensibility. American movies don't really go for that or couldn't if they tried, perhaps...although "My girl" was a terrific example of an American movie capturing that European sensibility. Instead, you get a sort of American Gothic. You get a good sense of the character of place in the small town Owen and Abby find themselves in. The flats that both find themselves in are nicely represented too...sort of in the Barton Fink mould...I mean the hotel room that movie was set some of the time.
Now, to the scene which didn't make it into the remake and which David Stratton criticised on "At the movies"...personally I think that maybe they made a wise choice leaving that naked scene out. Here's why: in the original, the interpretation you give to the Abby character's self-observations are directed towards viewing it as a question on her own anatomical status. In the remake, however, her question seems more about her essential nature. In other words, the remake gives you less information about the character, and I think that actually not having that information about her makes her self musings more philosophical...they can't really be taken literally any more.
It was also a concern of mine that some aspects of the relationship between Abby and her guardian would not be featured in the remake. They are. You're really not missing anything storywise from the remake...it's just that the original was more fulfilling...to me at least.
From memory, Abby looks more androgynous at times than her original counterpart (Eli). Australian actor Kodi Smit-McPhee looks the part as Owen. You also get the terrific character study of the original...perhaps made more explicit. E.g. you are constantly forming views of certain characters then having to reinterpret them later on, as more information comes to light. For instance, Owen is quite creepy early on in the movie. One of his class mates is also disturbing...but things aren't really that simple or black and white. It's a very nuanced character portrait many times in the film.
My biggest problem with the movie was the ending. Sure, it ticked that box too, from the original. However, I felt that the pool scene in the original gave a feeling of exhilaration which the remake lacked. Perhaps the original constructed that scene better, or did the sequence of events in a different way. What should have been a great emotional high for the movie is really just flat. It just failed to manipulate my emotions as the original did. That's a great shame. Perhaps it being so close to the original in scenes and screening is to blame? Maybe, but I just think that the original did that scene much better too.
Starting out wanting this movie to tick all the boxes of the original, in hindsight was a mistake...for me and the makers. If they had added many new elements to the story then perhaps the movie could have carved out its own identity more.
It's sad to me that the need for this remake was thought necessary. Watching the original, the performances were captivating...the central characters had such beautiful voices that I wished I could understand what they were saying without the need for subtitles. Here now you have a movie where you don't need the subtitles, but something has been lost in the translation...a little bit of soul.
The story is identical to the original...a troubled young teenage boy (about 13 years old) doesn't fit in at his high-school. Then a similarly aged teenage girl moves to his town and to a flat right next door to him. She seems strange too. They form an unlikely relationship...which seems to perhaps offer up salvation to both of them. However, some brutal murders soon start occurring in the small, isolated town they live in. The local policeman fears that a Satanic cult or some such is at work in the town and he tries to find it.
Comparing the two movies - since the original is still fresh in my memory, I had a check list watching the remake...seeing that all the key scenes for me were in the new movie. They pretty much were. Maybe that was a sort of distraction...ticking boxes as I watched the movie. Maybe a couple of extra scenes have been added in the US versions. David Stratton complained about one scene not being replicated in the remake...where the young girl is naked. In some ways this is better, I think. I'll go into that later.
The original let me in more. With the remake, I felt a bit of a distance to the story. Kodi Smit-McPhee as the young boy Owen is terrific in this movie. He brings a subtle understanding to the character. For instance, I like the way he casually taunts Chloë Moretz' Abby about coming inside his house. Chloë is very good too, but maybe her ticking all the boxes as far as the physicality of her character goes left Abby with a lot less soul. Both convey a nice sense of alienation from society...sort of like mall rats.
I suppose I was hoping that the remake would convey a very European sensibility. American movies don't really go for that or couldn't if they tried, perhaps...although "My girl" was a terrific example of an American movie capturing that European sensibility. Instead, you get a sort of American Gothic. You get a good sense of the character of place in the small town Owen and Abby find themselves in. The flats that both find themselves in are nicely represented too...sort of in the Barton Fink mould...I mean the hotel room that movie was set some of the time.
Now, to the scene which didn't make it into the remake and which David Stratton criticised on "At the movies"...personally I think that maybe they made a wise choice leaving that naked scene out. Here's why: in the original, the interpretation you give to the Abby character's self-observations are directed towards viewing it as a question on her own anatomical status. In the remake, however, her question seems more about her essential nature. In other words, the remake gives you less information about the character, and I think that actually not having that information about her makes her self musings more philosophical...they can't really be taken literally any more.
It was also a concern of mine that some aspects of the relationship between Abby and her guardian would not be featured in the remake. They are. You're really not missing anything storywise from the remake...it's just that the original was more fulfilling...to me at least.
From memory, Abby looks more androgynous at times than her original counterpart (Eli). Australian actor Kodi Smit-McPhee looks the part as Owen. You also get the terrific character study of the original...perhaps made more explicit. E.g. you are constantly forming views of certain characters then having to reinterpret them later on, as more information comes to light. For instance, Owen is quite creepy early on in the movie. One of his class mates is also disturbing...but things aren't really that simple or black and white. It's a very nuanced character portrait many times in the film.
My biggest problem with the movie was the ending. Sure, it ticked that box too, from the original. However, I felt that the pool scene in the original gave a feeling of exhilaration which the remake lacked. Perhaps the original constructed that scene better, or did the sequence of events in a different way. What should have been a great emotional high for the movie is really just flat. It just failed to manipulate my emotions as the original did. That's a great shame. Perhaps it being so close to the original in scenes and screening is to blame? Maybe, but I just think that the original did that scene much better too.
Starting out wanting this movie to tick all the boxes of the original, in hindsight was a mistake...for me and the makers. If they had added many new elements to the story then perhaps the movie could have carved out its own identity more.
It's sad to me that the need for this remake was thought necessary. Watching the original, the performances were captivating...the central characters had such beautiful voices that I wished I could understand what they were saying without the need for subtitles. Here now you have a movie where you don't need the subtitles, but something has been lost in the translation...a little bit of soul.