Skip to main content

Review: Let Me In


Director Matt Reeves was tasked impossibly with remaking a universally acclaimed horror masterpiece, Let The Right One In, for the American market.  The original is sombre, pensive, sensitive, and artful - perhaps the most profound meditation on love, desire, ageing, adolescence, and evil, in all of the horror film canon - so the idea that a new version would have anything to add was obscene.  Instead, Reeves has turned in an unusually sensitive reappraisal, which subtly readjusts the setting, and some of the scenes, without altering the themes, the mood, or the mise-en-scene.

The new version, Let Me In, has not been embraced by audiences - though it has made ten times as much as the art-house precedent.  This is too bad, but perhaps inevitable - Let Me In is not just a horror movie, but a character study, and a potential love story (as signalled by the introduction of the Romeo and Juliet theme here) - and it unfolds at a solemn, almost funereal pace.  Reeves directs with a commanding control of his style and allusions - the opening pays homage to that of Kubrick's The Shining, and early on, a nurse's reflection reminds us of the opening of Citizen Kane (a character who let no one in); his much-talked of use of Reagan's speech about evil is - as a boy coming of age at the same time (1983) as Owen the protagonist -  beautifully resonant; and the setting in Los Alamos, that most symbolic of places (where America's awesome post-war power was secured and arguably perverted), stands in wonderfully for the original Nordic landscape - who knew it snowed in New Mexico?

Where Reeves revs things up is in the serial murders, which are now slightly less creepy if no less brutal and strange (though the vehicular disaster is well-done); and in the more obvious display of Abby's supernatural metamorphosis.  Abby in the original was the dark Other, the immigrant to a blonde land, but here that is switched, so the boy is dark-haired, and the girl is fair.  Also, the parents are now occluded, and exist mostly in shadow, out of frame, on the phone.  The bullying is more effectively dramatised, and, in some ways, the exploration of pubescent sexual awakening is more openly admitted, as is the unsettling relationship between Abby and her grown-up helper.  I can't imagine a better remake possible - the casting is superb, and Elias Koteas is especially good.  The film is beautiful to watch, deeply upsetting and challenging, and also poignant. It remains a puzzle - one of the key tropes - perhaps unsolvable - the heart is no Rubik's Cube after all - about whether evil and good can co-exist, about the sacrifices that love requires, and about the rights of need and hunger.  In one sense, the children are killers and should be stopped.  In another, they are touchingly star-crossed friends.

In fact, they are both - and, like Bonnie and Clyde - their murderous transports are both rapturous and heinous.  But the romance of crime and the bonds of those damaged in childhood, by abuse or neglect, often strong enough to sustain and empower the rankest of co-dependencies.  A vampire's prerogative is to take life to keep their own quasi-life; but here, the cost to others is fully explored.  Four Specs out of Five.

Comments

Baz said…
I can't decide if I want to watch this or not. I love the original so much, I don't think I want to sully it's memory with a Hollywood remake. I have to ask myself is it so hard for people to read subtitles that we need an American version? Do American films get remade for European audiences? I'm sure they must or are they all subtitled?

Popular posts from this blog

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats , but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin 's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill , and Jorie Graham , are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell , smart poets? Or, Pound ?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views? Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se.  What do I mean by smart?

"I have crossed oceans of time to find you..."

In terms of great films about, and of, love, we have Vertigo, In The Mood for Love , and Casablanca , Doctor Zhivago , An Officer and a Gentleman , at the apex; as well as odder, more troubling versions, such as Sophie's Choice and  Silence of the Lambs .  I think my favourite remains Bram Stoker's Dracula , with the great immortal line "I have crossed oceans of time to find you...".

THE SWIFT REPORT 2023

I am writing this post without much enthusiasm, but with a sense of duty. This blog will be 20 years old soon, and though I rarely post here anymore, I owe it some attention. Of course in 2023, "Swift" now means one thing only, Taylor Swift, the billionaire musician. Gone are the days when I was asked if I was related to Jonathan Swift. The pre-eminent cultural Swift is now alive and TIME PERSON OF THE YEAR. There is no point in belabouring the obvious with delay: 2023 was a low-point in the low annals of human history - war, invasion, murder, in too many nations. Hate, division, the collapse of what truth is, exacerbated by advances in AI that may or may not prove apocalyptic, while global warming still seems to threaten the near-future safety of humanity. It's been deeply depressing. The world lost some wonderful poets, actors, musicians, and writers this year, as it often does. Two people I knew and admired greatly, Ian Ferrier and Kevin Higgins, poets and organise