A young couple move into a new apartment, only to be surrounded by peculiar neighbors and occurrences. When the wife becomes mysteriously pregnant, paranoia over the safety of her unborn child begins controlling her life.
In Los Alamos, New Mexico, the twelve year-old Owen is a lonely and outcast boy bullied in school by Kenny and two other classmates; at home, Owen dreams of avenging himself against the trio of bullies. He befriends his twelve-year-old next door neighbor, Abby, who only appears during the night in the playground of their building. Meanwhile, Abby's father is a wanted serial-killer who drains the blood of his victims to supply Abby, who is actually an ancient vampire. Abby advises Owen to fight Kenny; however, soon he discovers that she is a vampire, and he feels fear and love for the girl. Meanwhile a police officer is investigating the murder cases, believing that it is a satanic cult. Written by
Claudio Carvalho, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Director Matt Reeves explained why a deleted scene, showing Abby (Chloë Grace Moretz) being attacked as a human, was cut. (The scene was released on the Internet.) Contrary to the belief that the scene, depicting her being changed to a vampire and entering Owen's mind, would be too intense for the viewers, Reeves stated that he felt the scene would have disturbed the flow of the film. He remarked that he wished it would have been able to make the final cut. See more »
When Kenny, Mark and Donald first confront Owen at the ice pond, Mark's hands are out of his jacket. When the camera angles to show Kenny, Mark and Donald's faces, Mark's hands are suddenly in his jacket. See more »
One-three-one to dispatch, come in.
One-three-one, this is dispatch, go ahead.
This is one-three-one. We have a male, mid 50s, with burns over nine to nine and a half percent of his body. Prior to our arrival on scene, the patient apparently doused his head, neck and face with some sort of highly concentrated acid. patient's airway is severely compromised due to fume inhalation. Vital signs unstable. Please advise, patient is a federal suspect. We're coming in with a ...
See more »
As a fan of the 2008 Swedish film "Let The Right One In", I was originally very frustrated when I heard the news about the upcoming remake. "How do you ameliorate something that is already perfect?", I asked myself. I treated the remake with hostility and vowed to stay away from it. And then, I decided to open my mind.
I attended the world premiere of this film at the Toronto International Film Festival on Monday, September 13. I am very lucky to live in the proximity. This was the first year that I've attended the festival. Before seeing "Let Me In", I saw "127 Hours".
I liked the idea of seeing the remake of a film that I recently gave a second viewing. I thought it would be a fun challenge to sit there and compare both films while watching.
Before the screening (or it might have been after), the director, Matt Reeves (who launched his career with "Cloverfield"), was welcomed on stage to say a few words. It surprised me to find out that he, too, thought the original was fantastic and didn't understand why he was asked to remake it. However, after reading the book as well, he had the desire to work on his interpretation of it. After this speech, I gained a significant amount of respect for this man.
When the movie began, I was only expecting something satisfactory. But as the story progressed, I was breathless. It was a very captivating, interesting take, and I loved all the little modifications. I honestly believe that "Let Me In" is one of the greatest American remakes of all time.
Nevertheless, I still see the original, "Let The Right One In", as a superior film. Although it may be a biased opinion, I preferred the mood, atmosphere, and cinematography in the original. While the remake seemed to take a greater interest in the horrific violence, the original had the perfect blend of genres (thriller, romance, horror, fantasy). Both films had many beautiful contrasts: coldness vs warmth, chaos vs peace, guilt vs innocence, darkness vs delicacy, and despair vs hope.
I must also mention that I preferred the sense of ambiguity presented in the original. Very few questions were answered, and the whole film was more of a mystery left to interpretation. In contrast, Matt Reeves was more clear and direct in his screenplay with the mystery surrounding his characters. It's all a matter of personal preference, though. I believe that most people will prefer what Matt did, since the original has a certain style that less people can appreciate.
Despite the comparison, I believe that they are both great movies that can be enjoyed by everyone. Fans of the original-- rather than being narrow-minded and boycotting this version-- should give it a chance and appreciate it for what it is. Wouldn't you want more people in North America to discover this mesmerizing vampire tale, anyway?
I really enjoyed every aspect of "Let Me In". The child actors, Chloe Moretz (Kick-Ass) and Kodi Smit-McPhee (The Road) were both excellent choices. They proved to us, once again, that they are among the only child actors who actually have talent. Now that I think of it, the only thing that didn't impress me was the music. For an original score composed by Michael Giacchino (Up), I was quite disappointed. It was mediocre, in my opinion. It didn't convey the same emotion as Johan Soderqvist's music in "Let The Right One In".
Aside from that, "Let Me In" is a surprisingly great film for the fans of the original. And it would probably be a bloody masterpiece for those who haven't seen it. And yes, that lame vampire pun was definitely intended.
265 of 357 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?