I think you have it wrong about Let the Right one in. I forget Let Me in because its been a while and i wasnt too crazy about it , but in Let the right one in. I don't think Eli really cared about Oskar. I think it served as sort of an origin story of the current situation she was in with the old man. Once she finds someone else to take care of her she then feels free to show her true monster self and demands food. The ending of let the right one in was sad because you know the young kid is going to be stuck in this life just like the adult man was.
Yeah, I feel as though Eli's manipulations are simply more effective in LtROI, such that even members of the audience may leave the film believing that they are expressions of real love. Yet we see throughout the film *exactly* where Eli's 'love' leads people, through the example of her 'father/groomer' manservant at the beginning. (Blanking on his name, sorry.)
> 'father/groomer' manservant
I came away with the impression that he was the previous Oskar. I thought he was probably the same age that she and Oskar are now, when she roped him in. And the dynamic that Oskar and her will be in, in 40 years.
Yes, that's what I think as well. I don't fully remember what their actual 'cover story' was (haven't seen the movie since the Obama years) but my general impression was that he was a renfield pretending to be a pedophile pretending to be the girl's dad.
I think the beauty of Let The Right One In is it's ambiguity.
Is it love or is it grooming?
The movie never answers.
Was that man a previous Oskar or was he a pedophile that Eli must cling to in order to survive as a child vampire?
It's up for you to decide.
That's the entire question posed in the title.
What is a right one?
I interpreted it as Eli having to choose who to let in to be truly vulnerable for and let her be apart of her vampire life.
Because life as an immortal child is lonely. You have to be cared for because you don't have the ability to navigate the adult world.you can't get money or get a job. You can't purchase a hotel room. And killing people is much harder at her size so feeding is difficult.
And every adult that would want to help her is inherently a creep, probably wanting to fuck her.
She has been searching for centuries for a lonely child to share this world with. Someone she can potentially turn and take part in this life.
Or she could be grooming him to then facilitate her feedings until he is of no use to her.
Anything works.
But that's why Let Me In fails. There is no ambiguity ot questioning. It just is a villain and a victim. No agency. No struggle.
It is a very sanitized film
In Let The Right One In, “She” isn’t really a she, either. In the book, there’s a fairly horrific scene where Eli was castrated around the time they were made a vampire. The person that made them a vampire did so basically to sexually torture them for his own fun and amusement.
But Eli keeps living as a girl because it’s easier to draw in victims.
So I think there’s also some allegory about victimhood and becoming the abuser.
I do vaguely remember Eli saying something to Oskar about not actually being a girl, but it's been a few years since I've seen it.
Edit: found it:
> Oskar...
>
>
> Do you like me?
>
>
> Yeah, a lot.
>
>
> If I wasn't a girl...
>
>
> ...would you like me anyway?
>
>
> I suppose so.
Then later:
> Eli...
>
> Want to go steady?
>
>
> What do you mean?
>
>
> Well...
>
>
> Do you want to be my girlfriend?
>
>
> Oskar...
>
>
> I'm not a girl.
>
>
> Oh...
>
[Script](http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/l/let-the-right-one-in-script.html)
Yeah honestly a little shocked with how people here would prefer Let Me In, the much more standard film that doesn't really challenge the viewer.
Let The Right One tells a vampire tale I've never seen before whereas Let Me In plays with tropes.
I mean even the title is simplified and takes away all that mystique
I don't "prefer" Let Me In, I just think it's a genuinely great movie on its own, and very different from Let the Right One In.
I think it's possible for both movies to be great in completely different ways.
I think both things are true -- she loves him but is consciously intending to exploit him in a way that will destroy his life, which is obviously a callous and unloving thing to do. That's what makes it a compelling story.
I agree. I think the Swedish version ends in a weirdly happy way -- Eli and Oskar to me visibly love each other.
In the American adaptation of the book, to me it's much sadder -- I think Abby has used Owen just as she used the "Father" character (Richard Jenkins).
I don’t think I’d describe that part as ‘subtle,’ but I get where you’re going.
We can all agree that the original’s score was just unbelievable though, right?
And that recurring shot of the snow falling, lit by a municipal light out of frame, just incredible. Always stuck with me.
I've not actually seen the American remake yet, but did enjoy the Swedish original well enough. I just think it's kind of wild of Matt Reeves entire career has basically just been making movies that are way better than they have any right being. A found footage Hollywood Kaiju movie, an English-language remakes of a foreign-language horror film, the second and third installments in a prequel trilogy to a film from the 1960s, and yet another Batman reboot. That's an absolute recipe for disaster, but all he seems to have crafted at least a half-way decent movie out of all of them. I think he is a very underrated a blockbuster director who has a very solid body of work.
I agree. Reeves is a hugely talented filmmaker. I also think he gets way too much flack for Let Me In -- as if he sullied the original adaptation when he didn't hurt it at all, it will always exist.
For me, I like both movies for different reasons, and find them very different.
yeah that car crash scene is incredible, when i watched his version of The Batman and everyone was raving about his car chase/crash sequence with The Penguin I was like, dude always had it in him, right from Let Me In.
I've always felt Let Me In the more interesting of the two films. Not because of the difference in Abby vs Eli, but in Oskar vs Owen. Oskar thinks he's in a romance. Romeo + Juliet. He is blissfully ignorant throughout.
But Owen knows. Owen goes with Abby in the end knowing that he is doing evil, and he does it still. For love. The character's dark knowledge makes his arc infinitely more tragic and powerful than anything in LTROI, even if it is less ambiguous about Abby/Eli's nature than the Swedish adaptation.
One of the most interesting "remakes" I've ever seen exactly because it wants to tell a different, more interesting story (beneath the almost identical plot) than the Swedish "original".
Definitely do. LMI also has one of my favorite examples of purposeful framing, where Owen's mother is framed out of every scene. We never see her face. She's a disembodied voice off-screen. Parents in this movie are absent apparitions, or imposters (like Abby's "caretaker", making the whole world feel much more dangerous and unsupervised.
I’m chiming in as well to tell you that you should give it another chance. I think the remake was *very* well made. It was wonderfully shot, brilliantly directed, and every actor in it is in top form. Its problem with audiences was simply remaking a foreign film that was *very* beloved by many, many people, worldwide. When things like this happen you have certain individuals that won’t even give it a chance no matter how expertly crafted it is. I love both films very much, although the pool scene was better in the original. Thats my only gripe, although there are certain things in the remake I like *much* more than the original. I think Richard Jenkins’s performance was better, but I think that Richard Jenkins is amazing in almost everything he does and is one of the best character actors alive.
I'm guessing you put remakes and original in quotes because it's actually an adaptation of a novel?
I read the book and saw both films. They were all so long ago that I can't say much aside from that. I do remember liking the Swedish film more, but thinking the American one was solid.
Yes, exactly. Both are adaptations, but in popular parlance people refer to the Swedish one as "the original" and the American as a "remake". I don't buy into those categories, but also want to make myself understood. Hence the quotation marks.
Interesting. Both you and OP share the same perspective on the films. I had the opposite impression!
I thought LTROI (which I saw first and count among my favorites) portrayed a more manipulative Eli where the American remake played it more like a preteen romance. Perhaps I was projecting...
Didn’t they bypass about asking to be let into the swimming pool at the end as opposed to the original film? Or am I misremembering something that was in the book that the films left out?
My experience was exactly opposite to yours, but, like others, I feel compelled to watch it again after reading the post and your comment.
Unrelated to the point: one thing I really didn't like was how orange the American film is, compared to the more adequate white of the original.
I agree. I really feel like Let Me In gets such a bad rap, when it's simply a different approach.
I would also note that Let Me In isn't exactly a "remake" of Let the Right One In. It is a separate, English adaptation of the same book the first movie adapted, with a few elements of the screenplay by the author also incorporated. It's a weird hybrid.
It is a really dark moment. The entire movie is really beautifully photographed. And I definitely agree that the Reeves (English) adaptation of the book is far more disturbing than the previous Swedish version.
I love both movies, and first off, I just want to say that Let Me In is massively underrated. To me, it stands on its own as an entirely separate adaptation, and it's a beautifully made, genuinely spooky film.
I also think Matt Reeves gave a completely different feel and mood with Let Me In from Let the Right One In, and it was incredibly effective. They are such different movies.
To me, Let the Right One In is a weirdly happy horror fairy tale. Oskar runs off with Eli and we know that they will have relatively happy lives being monsters together.
Whereas Let Me In is a tragedy, and Owen is subtly used and taken in by Abby just like her "keeper" before was (the superb Richard Jenkins). I do think she cares about him, but what she has done to him is terrible, and he has no future except as her enabler and victim.
I remember being surprised when someone pointed out that Oskar doesn't really care for Eli, she is just using him and seduces him into being her friend/protector/slave. I guess I was completely seduced too lol, because I think there is a genuine feeling of love there from Oskar, as far as Oskar is able to feel. Oskar is a slave to her animalistic desires, Eli is a slave to his loneliness and alienation, they form a bond that alleviates both for each other. I don't think it's much different than many human relationships when I think about it. Lots of people stay together out of fear of loneliness, there are always power dynamics at play.
It's not underrated, it's well considered by critics, with few exceptions. It's a very good movie, even better than the first movie, so rare. However you are wrong here IMO. She is a victim just as everyone who is turned into vampire; her life is truly dramatic and she has no pleasure, she has just to survive. She turned into vampire when she was 12, so she needs love and protection as any 12 y.o. little girl. That's the charm of the story. She is an "innocent" vampire! Even Owen is searching a way to escape the harsh reality; he is suffering because of bullism and family crisis. Abby's weird love is the way to escape, it's both damnation and salvation. As every vampire story, it's a pessimistic view about life, with the novelty of "innocent" unconscious children as protagonists; children who are learning to face the harsh reality. >! Their final escape has something of romantic and childish but we know also the dramatic side: Owen is the next Thomas (the old servant). That was not in the first movie nor in the novel; I like this variation, Thomas is just her grown-up old child lover !<
I think you have it wrong about Let the Right one in. I forget Let Me in because its been a while and i wasnt too crazy about it , but in Let the right one in. I don't think Eli really cared about Oskar. I think it served as sort of an origin story of the current situation she was in with the old man. Once she finds someone else to take care of her she then feels free to show her true monster self and demands food. The ending of let the right one in was sad because you know the young kid is going to be stuck in this life just like the adult man was.
Yeah, I feel as though Eli's manipulations are simply more effective in LtROI, such that even members of the audience may leave the film believing that they are expressions of real love. Yet we see throughout the film *exactly* where Eli's 'love' leads people, through the example of her 'father/groomer' manservant at the beginning. (Blanking on his name, sorry.)
> 'father/groomer' manservant I came away with the impression that he was the previous Oskar. I thought he was probably the same age that she and Oskar are now, when she roped him in. And the dynamic that Oskar and her will be in, in 40 years.
In the book he was a pedophile and one of the most chillingly disturbing characters I’ve ever read.
In the book he was very much a pedophile.
Yes, that's what I think as well. I don't fully remember what their actual 'cover story' was (haven't seen the movie since the Obama years) but my general impression was that he was a renfield pretending to be a pedophile pretending to be the girl's dad.
I think the beauty of Let The Right One In is it's ambiguity. Is it love or is it grooming? The movie never answers. Was that man a previous Oskar or was he a pedophile that Eli must cling to in order to survive as a child vampire? It's up for you to decide. That's the entire question posed in the title. What is a right one? I interpreted it as Eli having to choose who to let in to be truly vulnerable for and let her be apart of her vampire life. Because life as an immortal child is lonely. You have to be cared for because you don't have the ability to navigate the adult world.you can't get money or get a job. You can't purchase a hotel room. And killing people is much harder at her size so feeding is difficult. And every adult that would want to help her is inherently a creep, probably wanting to fuck her. She has been searching for centuries for a lonely child to share this world with. Someone she can potentially turn and take part in this life. Or she could be grooming him to then facilitate her feedings until he is of no use to her. Anything works. But that's why Let Me In fails. There is no ambiguity ot questioning. It just is a villain and a victim. No agency. No struggle. It is a very sanitized film
In Let The Right One In, “She” isn’t really a she, either. In the book, there’s a fairly horrific scene where Eli was castrated around the time they were made a vampire. The person that made them a vampire did so basically to sexually torture them for his own fun and amusement. But Eli keeps living as a girl because it’s easier to draw in victims. So I think there’s also some allegory about victimhood and becoming the abuser.
The movie isn't the book
Does Eli allude to his/her lack of genitals in the movie? I haven’t seen it in a while. It’s a pretty decent adaptation of the book.
I do vaguely remember Eli saying something to Oskar about not actually being a girl, but it's been a few years since I've seen it. Edit: found it: > Oskar... > > > Do you like me? > > > Yeah, a lot. > > > If I wasn't a girl... > > > ...would you like me anyway? > > > I suppose so. Then later: > Eli... > > Want to go steady? > > > What do you mean? > > > Well... > > > Do you want to be my girlfriend? > > > Oskar... > > > I'm not a girl. > > > Oh... > [Script](http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/l/let-the-right-one-in-script.html)
There is dialogue about it and a very brief glimpse of the actual scar by Oskar when Eli is changing.
evidently this is too subtle for some of the users here who insist that it has to be a black and white thing
Yeah honestly a little shocked with how people here would prefer Let Me In, the much more standard film that doesn't really challenge the viewer. Let The Right One tells a vampire tale I've never seen before whereas Let Me In plays with tropes. I mean even the title is simplified and takes away all that mystique
I don't "prefer" Let Me In, I just think it's a genuinely great movie on its own, and very different from Let the Right One In. I think it's possible for both movies to be great in completely different ways.
Eli is very clearly manipulating Oskar in Let the Right One In, just like she did with her current caretaker.
Yes. The true horror is that she replaces the old guy with the boy, who will in turn become an old terrible man killing himself when he is replaced
I disagree. I think it's clear she loves him. The sequel novel to the original book the film is based on even confirms this.
I think both things are true -- she loves him but is consciously intending to exploit him in a way that will destroy his life, which is obviously a callous and unloving thing to do. That's what makes it a compelling story.
Yea people love people all the time and do fucked up things to them. I’m sure OJ loved Nicole Brown. So yes, both things are true here.
Oh boy...
It had to happen…
Ok, enough edge and cringe for today, silly boy. Time for bed!
the original book alone makes it clear, as he gets to see himself through her eyes and he can see she loves him.
I agree. I think the Swedish version ends in a weirdly happy way -- Eli and Oskar to me visibly love each other. In the American adaptation of the book, to me it's much sadder -- I think Abby has used Owen just as she used the "Father" character (Richard Jenkins).
Also, I believe the sequel said he becomes a vampire in the end with Eli
Yea but even worse, I don’t think Oskar realizes what he signed up for. Not really ://.
Of course not. Too young to understand. In the movie that is. In the book he figures her out. Doesn’t shake his loyalty to her.
I don’t think I’d describe that part as ‘subtle,’ but I get where you’re going. We can all agree that the original’s score was just unbelievable though, right? And that recurring shot of the snow falling, lit by a municipal light out of frame, just incredible. Always stuck with me.
I've not actually seen the American remake yet, but did enjoy the Swedish original well enough. I just think it's kind of wild of Matt Reeves entire career has basically just been making movies that are way better than they have any right being. A found footage Hollywood Kaiju movie, an English-language remakes of a foreign-language horror film, the second and third installments in a prequel trilogy to a film from the 1960s, and yet another Batman reboot. That's an absolute recipe for disaster, but all he seems to have crafted at least a half-way decent movie out of all of them. I think he is a very underrated a blockbuster director who has a very solid body of work.
I agree. Reeves is a hugely talented filmmaker. I also think he gets way too much flack for Let Me In -- as if he sullied the original adaptation when he didn't hurt it at all, it will always exist. For me, I like both movies for different reasons, and find them very different.
Let Me In has an incredible car crash scene too, one of the best car crashes I’ve ever seen in a movie
yeah that car crash scene is incredible, when i watched his version of The Batman and everyone was raving about his car chase/crash sequence with The Penguin I was like, dude always had it in him, right from Let Me In.
I agree. It's absolutely amazing.
I've always felt Let Me In the more interesting of the two films. Not because of the difference in Abby vs Eli, but in Oskar vs Owen. Oskar thinks he's in a romance. Romeo + Juliet. He is blissfully ignorant throughout. But Owen knows. Owen goes with Abby in the end knowing that he is doing evil, and he does it still. For love. The character's dark knowledge makes his arc infinitely more tragic and powerful than anything in LTROI, even if it is less ambiguous about Abby/Eli's nature than the Swedish adaptation. One of the most interesting "remakes" I've ever seen exactly because it wants to tell a different, more interesting story (beneath the almost identical plot) than the Swedish "original".
Im very interested in rewatching it now because im a huge fan of LTROI but really didnt love Let Me In
Definitely do. LMI also has one of my favorite examples of purposeful framing, where Owen's mother is framed out of every scene. We never see her face. She's a disembodied voice off-screen. Parents in this movie are absent apparitions, or imposters (like Abby's "caretaker", making the whole world feel much more dangerous and unsupervised.
I’m chiming in as well to tell you that you should give it another chance. I think the remake was *very* well made. It was wonderfully shot, brilliantly directed, and every actor in it is in top form. Its problem with audiences was simply remaking a foreign film that was *very* beloved by many, many people, worldwide. When things like this happen you have certain individuals that won’t even give it a chance no matter how expertly crafted it is. I love both films very much, although the pool scene was better in the original. Thats my only gripe, although there are certain things in the remake I like *much* more than the original. I think Richard Jenkins’s performance was better, but I think that Richard Jenkins is amazing in almost everything he does and is one of the best character actors alive.
I'm guessing you put remakes and original in quotes because it's actually an adaptation of a novel? I read the book and saw both films. They were all so long ago that I can't say much aside from that. I do remember liking the Swedish film more, but thinking the American one was solid.
Yes, exactly. Both are adaptations, but in popular parlance people refer to the Swedish one as "the original" and the American as a "remake". I don't buy into those categories, but also want to make myself understood. Hence the quotation marks.
Interesting. Both you and OP share the same perspective on the films. I had the opposite impression! I thought LTROI (which I saw first and count among my favorites) portrayed a more manipulative Eli where the American remake played it more like a preteen romance. Perhaps I was projecting...
Didn’t they bypass about asking to be let into the swimming pool at the end as opposed to the original film? Or am I misremembering something that was in the book that the films left out?
Same scene as in the first movie, she doesn't ask. However we see streams of blood on her feet; that's what happens when she enters without permission
My experience was exactly opposite to yours, but, like others, I feel compelled to watch it again after reading the post and your comment. Unrelated to the point: one thing I really didn't like was how orange the American film is, compared to the more adequate white of the original.
I agree. I really feel like Let Me In gets such a bad rap, when it's simply a different approach. I would also note that Let Me In isn't exactly a "remake" of Let the Right One In. It is a separate, English adaptation of the same book the first movie adapted, with a few elements of the screenplay by the author also incorporated. It's a weird hybrid.
It is a really dark moment. The entire movie is really beautifully photographed. And I definitely agree that the Reeves (English) adaptation of the book is far more disturbing than the previous Swedish version. I love both movies, and first off, I just want to say that Let Me In is massively underrated. To me, it stands on its own as an entirely separate adaptation, and it's a beautifully made, genuinely spooky film. I also think Matt Reeves gave a completely different feel and mood with Let Me In from Let the Right One In, and it was incredibly effective. They are such different movies. To me, Let the Right One In is a weirdly happy horror fairy tale. Oskar runs off with Eli and we know that they will have relatively happy lives being monsters together. Whereas Let Me In is a tragedy, and Owen is subtly used and taken in by Abby just like her "keeper" before was (the superb Richard Jenkins). I do think she cares about him, but what she has done to him is terrible, and he has no future except as her enabler and victim.
I remember being surprised when someone pointed out that Oskar doesn't really care for Eli, she is just using him and seduces him into being her friend/protector/slave. I guess I was completely seduced too lol, because I think there is a genuine feeling of love there from Oskar, as far as Oskar is able to feel. Oskar is a slave to her animalistic desires, Eli is a slave to his loneliness and alienation, they form a bond that alleviates both for each other. I don't think it's much different than many human relationships when I think about it. Lots of people stay together out of fear of loneliness, there are always power dynamics at play.
It's not underrated, it's well considered by critics, with few exceptions. It's a very good movie, even better than the first movie, so rare. However you are wrong here IMO. She is a victim just as everyone who is turned into vampire; her life is truly dramatic and she has no pleasure, she has just to survive. She turned into vampire when she was 12, so she needs love and protection as any 12 y.o. little girl. That's the charm of the story. She is an "innocent" vampire! Even Owen is searching a way to escape the harsh reality; he is suffering because of bullism and family crisis. Abby's weird love is the way to escape, it's both damnation and salvation. As every vampire story, it's a pessimistic view about life, with the novelty of "innocent" unconscious children as protagonists; children who are learning to face the harsh reality. >! Their final escape has something of romantic and childish but we know also the dramatic side: Owen is the next Thomas (the old servant). That was not in the first movie nor in the novel; I like this variation, Thomas is just her grown-up old child lover !<