Let Me In (2010) - Let The Right One In remake

[pdn]

Hot off the presses from twitch is the trailer for the remake.

http://twitchfilm.net/news/2010/07/f...-brilliant.php

Hammer's Let Me In webpage:

http://www.hammerfilms.com/productio...e-right-one-in

First impressions?

[Mandi Apple]

TBH, having seen the trailer, it doesn't look too bad to me, despite my misgivings: some of it looks like a straight shot-for-shot lift from the original, and it seems as though Reeves has tried his very best to keep a little of the artistic aesthetic and atmosphere, too, which is laudable since the temptation must be to, y'know, make it louder and more in-your-face to appeal to the usual teen screamer market...

*scratches head* I shall of course reserve judgement fully until I've seen it, but these things make me feel marginally reassured

[pdn]

The only thing I don't like about the trailer is that the film looks a little....warmer.
Whereas with the original the coldness of the environment was palpable.
Oh, and the music is something I'm not sure about.
Like you, I will reserve judgement until the film comes out.


Very annoying official site:

http://www.helpme.net/

[RubyGloom]

 REALLY disappointed they've done away with Eli/Abby's ambigious gender. 

[GhostWearingRedShoes]

Originally Posted by RubyGloom

 REALLY disappointed they've done away with Eli/Abby's ambigious gender. 

Wait wait wait, are they not putting that in the remake? That's sorta what made the original so ... I don't know. Different. Tender. If they leave that out I'm gonna be disappointed as well

[sadakofanboy]

fell in love with the original... is hoping this doesn't turn into the next ring-series, where the film is remade 2 or 3 times, hopefully 1 film remake is good. I know this probably doesn't fit the main discussion, but its my two cents.

You know what I'd find really funny, this as a musical.

[marie]

hmf..
I am trying to overlook the fact that I dislike remakes in general, but, from what saw from thr trailer, this feels like an "american" movie..
.. No, I don´t dislike the american people ( or the country) at all - though I do have some opinions on your government and especially their foreign politics, but thats an entirely different subject, probably better discussed somewhere else, and completely besides the point:
My gripe with this admittedly short teaser is wholly in the cultural differences realm -
The book and movie in Swedish gives a pretty good account of the darker gloomier mood of this country .. and the whole feel of the 1980´s is beautifully captured.. as well as being a gloomy, depressive, and quite real in it´s portrayal of the local"drunks" for example (I _know_ all these people you see, (excepting the vampire) I meet them every day)
..
Howerver, I did not get even the slightest feeling of Sweden in the 1980´s out of this clip.. and I gather it´s to be an "americanized" remake.. erm.. why?

not going to getinto this subject too much now, but, exactly what springs the need, in the US, to remake a good movie even if it is not in one´s native language, and "aericanize" it?

(no, I am only being a little extra oversensitive because the original is in swedish - I only speak 3 1/2 languages after all, and one is English - I only learned one of my 3"native languges" (swedish - I skipped the Finnish and the NorthSapmi - both vrey prominent parts of my heritage, butnot useful ones - and elected to go for german nd french instead( I´m not good at either mind you)

[pdn]

Originally Posted by RubyGloom

 REALLY disappointed they've done away with Eli/Abby's ambigious gender. 

Disappointing? Yes. Surprising? No.

[Mandi Apple]

Originally Posted by marie

not going to getinto this subject too much now, but, exactly what springs the need, in the US, to remake a good movie even if it is not in one´s native language, and "aericanize" it?

Half the time it's a simple matter: mainstream Americans refuse to read subtitles, hence having to remake anything in a foreign language.

About the 'Americanising' bit though, I was actually quite surprised by that trailer that it didn't seem as Americanised as I feared it might be. Having seen things changed so heavily in The Uninvited and, well, pretty much every Hollywood remake of a foreign film, I thought it was nigh on inevitable, but it looks like Reeves has at least tried to remain sensitive to the ethos of the original from that trailer.

Of course, it's a simple question of changing a film so that mainstream American audiences can relate to it and don't have to try to battle with the finer points of other people's cultures, but we've discussed these issues a thousand times before, and it's my fervent opinion that Hollywood directors are overly patronising and treating their audiences as if they need to be spoon-fed watered-down pabulum instead of crediting them with some intelligence

Anyway, we'll see what we see with this one - it's almost impossible to draw too many inferences from a trailer, after all, but from my first glance, it doesn't look to be too watered-down... time will tell, I guess

[marie]

Originally Posted by Mandi Apple

Half the time it's a simple matter: mainstream Americans refuse to read subtitles, hence having to remake anything in a foreign language.

About the 'Americanising' bit though, I was actually quite surprised by that trailer that it didn't seem as Americanised as I feared it might be. Having seen things changed so heavily in The Uninvited and, well, pretty much every Hollywood remake of a foreign film, I thought it was nigh on inevitable, but it looks like Reeves has at least tried to remain sensitive to the ethos of the original from that trailer.

Of course, it's a simple question of changing a film so that mainstream American audiences can relate to it and don't have to try to battle with the finer points of other people's cultures, but we've discussed these issues a thousand times before, and it's my fervent opinion that Hollywood directors are overly patronising and treating their audiences as if they need to be spoon-fed watered-down pabulum instead of crediting them with some intelligence

Anyway, we'll see what we see with this one - it's almost impossible to draw too many inferences from a trailer, after all, but from my first glance, it doesn't look to be too watered-down... time will tell, I guess

Mainstream americans don´t like to read subtitles eh -- and here I was trying to cnvince myself the mainstream people are not a bunch of morons.. I mean, I did assume they can read
(maybe I should have edited that sentence out, I am not in a good mood tonight - apologies to anyone who feels like a mainsteam audience - any takers?.. guessed not, in this fine environment, so we can sneer all we like presumably)

On the other hand, speaking as someone who dosen´t have english as my 1st language, maybe we "others" have a slight advantage in that subtitles are not in the least bit odd to us - hell, I think maybe 90-is percent ( or more, pulling statistics out of, erm, somewhere - in other words I´m guessing) of the world does not understand my native language, so maybe "we" get a different perspective from the start.

And you have a good point there - maybe it dosen´t feel "American" as such - but it most definitely dosen´t have the feel of a swedish film either - and why should americans be excused from battling with the finer points of other peoples cultures, when the rest of us are doing it (theirs for example) ;P?

[Mandi Apple]

Originally Posted by marie

Mainstream americans don´t like to read subtitles eh -- and here I was trying to cnvince myself the mainstream people are not a bunch of morons.. I mean, I did assume they can read
(maybe I should have edited that sentence out, I am not in a good mood tonight - apologies to anyone who feels like a mainsteam audience - any takers?.. guessed not, in this fine environment, so we can sneer all we like presumably)

Oh, sneer away, God knows I like to sneer quite unreservedly at anyone who won't read subs

I don't think that what I said was absolutely right, though - I mean, mainstream Brit audiences aren't that fond of reading subtitles either! I guess most people aren't keen on it but since they're not generally the sort of people I discuss cinema with, then I end up seeing it as a minority opinion, which is probably wrong. My own parents are not so fond of foreign films and reading subs, so I think we are actually probably in the minority!

Of course, there are a lot of people who have literacy problems too, which was pointed out to me by Alex as he works in a school and has made a point that not everyone is such a good reader, and so subs obviously wouldn't suit them if they have trouble keeping up with them

Nah, it's the people who can read perfectly well and choose not to because it's too much like hard work that piss me off And that's not only some Americans, obviously - I really only think of American-made films being targeted at American audiences because that's domestic product, which is also a bit wrong of me - I'm the Queen of Mistakes today

And you have a good point there - maybe it dosen´t feel "American" as such - but it most definitely dosen´t have the feel of a swedish film either - and why should americans be excused from battling with the finer points of other peoples cultures, when the rest of us are doing it (theirs for example) ;P?

I completely agree with that! It might actually teach people a little bit more about world culture if they watch more foreign movies - I certainly wouldn't know anything about the traditions, culture and customs of East Asia were it not for my watching movies (and reading books, natch!). It seems wrong to just assume that most people won't be able to relate to a foreign culture via movies, and that I blame on the Hollywood film "machinery" making unfounded assumptions about their target market

[GhostWearingRedShoes]

I honestly don't believe it's a subtitle problem. Sure, there are tons of people who hate reading subtiles; not just in the US, but there's also a large number of people who don't mind at all. The DVD for the original film is dubbed and subbed, which means that viewers are not forced to read the subtitles. And it's not like people demanded a remake because they were too lazy to put on their reading glasses. I started thinking that perhaps they remade this film just to earn fast money. I mean the original source is there, all they really had to do was make a few props and get the right actors.

According to producer Simon Oakes:

"...the story was so great, so beautiful, that it should be seen by a bigger audience. So I was always saying to myself, people in Manhattan have seen it, guys like you [genre journalists/fans] because it's in your wheelhouse, in New York, in Chicago, in Chelsea, in Notting Hill, in London but no one in Glasgow or Edinburgh or Bristol or Idaho or Pittsburgh has seen this film. It's a story that needs to be seen by a wider audience. Then it came down to [the question], how do you achieve that? By paying homage to the original."

Paying homage to the original is the best way to show the film to the world? Hmm, that's funny, especially considering the fact that  Eli's castration  was possibly removed from this version. That's not exactly the same 'great' story he wanted to share so much. Couldn't he just tour around the world with special screenings of the original film, if he really wanted to share it that bad?

I'm not bashing the remake, just so you know. Quite honestly I'm looking forward to it and have neither high or low expectations. I just strongly believe there was no real reason to remake it. But then again, when is there a good reason to recreate someone else's work? I'm pretty sure it's okay to do it once in a while. Frankly I prefer remakes of really old films, IF they're done right. But the topic of remakes is really tricky. Maybe they're make just for money, maybe the producer/directer really did just love the original enough that they wanted to be a part of it somehow. Who knows?

And also, what's with that official website? When you solve the morse code all it does is ask for your email so you can attend Comic Con. That's it.

[Ichi-kun]

I can't pass judgment on this film, or the original (particularly since I haven't even seen it yet), but I remember reading that quote from Simon Oakes on imdb and just thinking... no, that's not how you pay homage to the original.

I digress. I still need to see the original film, and I'd like to read the book at that, but the trailer for the remake doesn't actually make it look that bad in my opinion. Yet, why not take a risk and release the original here? If a film like Pan's Labyrinth can get a wide release here (which it did), and be successful (which it has been- it's made over $37,600,000 since its theatrical release), then why not this one? Surely, the easiest way to give a film a wider audience is by releasing it to a wider audience. Not by remaking it.

[pdn]

Originally Posted by GhostWearingRedShoes

I honestly don't believe it's a subtitle problem. Sure, there are tons of people who hate reading subtiles; not just in the US, but there's also a large number of people who don't mind at all. The DVD for the original film is dubbed and subbed, which means that viewers are not forced to read the subtitles.

You're completely right in the point you're making. Whenever the subject of
American remakes comes up on forums/ message boards the discussion always
seems to descend into generalizing about American audiences being too stupid
to read subtitles, or too parochial to watch foreign films. Really? Was LTROI a success
at the Canadian box office? In Britain? Australia? New Zealand? Ireland?
Did it do well at the cinema anywhere outside of Scandinavia? No. Not even in
the so-called cultured continent of Europe.
Of course subtitles are a major issue. There will always be people who simply
refuse to watch a subtitled film. But people have to have an opportunity to see
the film in the first place (I had to travel an awful long way to see it at a cinema).
Marketing & distribution of these films is, arguably, the real issue. As Ichi-Kun
points out, Pan's Labyrinth was a success because it got a wide release and was
(relatively) heavily marketed. But that was probably as much to do with the
fact that del Toro was already a successful Hollywood director, and one who
straddled the mainstream, arthouse and genre cinema, and as such was a "safer"
bet for distributors. Ditto Ang Lee with Crouching Tiger... Even some of the more
successful foreign films of recent years were marketed on the back of these
films - The Orphanage was pushed as if it was a del Toro film, and it's debatable
whether Zhang Yimou's Hero would have gotten the release it did without the
success of Crouching Tiger... and Tarantino's backing.

Cinema's in small towns and cities can't afford to take a chance - or maybe
are not allowed - to take a chance on a foreign film that will not have gotten much
marketing. Likewise it's a little unfair to people to blame them for going with
the safer option of a Hollywood film that's made by/ stars people that they have
heard of, rather than an unknown foreign film. Going to the cinema these days
is not cheap! Also, critics in newspapers and magazines have to take a certain
amount of blame for pushing foreign films as weighty, dour intellectual affairs.
Most people go to the cinema for a bit of escapism after a shitty day/week of
work - dour intellectualism is not what they want.
It's also worth pointing out that arthouse cinemas in many English speaking
countries are struggling to survive. If a cinema that specialises in foreign films
can't survive, why on earth would a mainstream cinema in a town/ small city
take the financial risk of releasing such films. It also raises the question of just
how many of the people who complain about remakes of foreign films actually
bother to go out an support them when said films are being shown in cinemas.
I'd bet that most of the people complaining about the LTROI remake who had
an opportunity to see it in a cinema watched it at home on dvd, or illegal
download, instead.

As for remakes. Remaking films has been around since the silent era. It's not
something that's going to end any time soon. Of course it's lazy - and sometimes,
admittedly rarely, it's a good thing - but no one is forced to go see the remake
and it doesn't alter the quality of the original. I'm sure Tomas Alfredson found it
a lot easier to get financing for his next film and John Ajvide Lindqvist will sell
a lot more copies of his novel off the back of the remake.



Anyway, back to this film. The poster is rather gorgeous:

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/20995

[tylerrobbins]

I have been absolutely losing my mind over this, and I hate myself for it. I should be more passive as a viewer; the original is lovely, the book is lovely, they can withstand a remake. But the ethos of what has compelled the director to remake it so shallow and so cheap that it makes my heart hurt.

I'm too sensitive about this sort of thing though.

[Gabriel]

I went to film school at an art college. There were a lot of dyslexic people there and they simply couldn't read subtitles.

I don't have an issue with remakes per se. There are some great ones such as The Magnificent Seven.

It's dumbed down remakes that are the problem!

[GhostWearingRedShoes]

Originally Posted by Ichi-kun

I digress. I still need to see the original film, and I'd like to read the book at that, but the trailer for the remake doesn't actually make it look that bad in my opinion. Yet, why not take a risk and release the original here? If a film like Pan's Labyrinth can get a wide release here (which it did), and be successful (which it has been- it's made over $37,600,000 since its theatrical release), then why not this one? Surely, the easiest way to give a film a wider audience is by releasing it to a wider audience. Not by remaking it.

That's exactly my point! Which leads me to think that perhaps it's all just for the money. But you're right, the trailer seems decent enough, which makes the whole remake thing tricky. Oh and by the way, the book is now available at Barnes and Noble. I'm not sure if there's one in your area, but I saw the book during my last visit. Didn't exactly have the cash so I just skimmed through it.

A new trailer is out now and can be seen here http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi3707045401/

A red band version of that trailer (with 8 extra seconds) can be seen here http://www.traileraddict.com/trailer...d-band-trailer

And a new poster can be seen here http://www.heyuguys.co.uk/2010/07/26...oster-appears/

I dig the new poster.

[Troika]

I didn't think I would be saying this but Let Me In looks really good imo.

[Mark Gor]

I found this a beautiful and touching film. Mixes a coming of age story, with first love and also has some great gory bits!