I'm a zombiephile. I love zombie movies, zombie games, zombie comics, zombie-themed t-shirts, etc. Something about the shuffling, flesh-eating undead just entertains me in a way that buddy cops, ninjas, or robots never will. But that doesn't mean I can't distinguish between good and bad zombie entertainment:
The good: Dead Space
I don't understand why nobody bought this game. Actually, I do understand - it's not part of an established franchise - but more more people should have played it. Yes, the story is fairly derivative from other space zombie games, going all the way back to Doom. But the game designers took the elements of the genre and did something that was amazing; they made a game that was legitmately scary. Outer space is effectively used as a backdrop, the zombie designs are unique, and the game mechanics are incredibly well thought-out. It's everything that Resident Evil 5 is not.
The bad: Diary of the Dead
George Romero is a legend among zombie afficionados, but that doesn't mean he can't occassionally produce a lemon. Like Dead Space, this movie is very derivative, primarily of Romero's earlier work in the genre. Romero also borrows the central conceit of the Blair Witch Project; it is filmed by an amateur who is actually living through the events depicted. As in his earlier movies, Romero attempts to work in some social commentary, this time about the dishonesty of corporate media and the power of the Internet (etc., etc.). The main problem with the movie is that Romero never figures out how to make the "amateur" film style work in a fairly standard zombie flick. Unlike [REC], which used the "amateur" film technique to dole out scares and control the audience's perception of events, Diary feels like a generic zombie holocaust movie with lousy camerawork and obnoxious narration. The artificiality of the project is always evident, which only makes Romero's preachy social commentary that much more tedious. It also doesn't help that the acting is sub-par and the make-up effects are shoddy, even by the standards of low budget horror.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
We live in interesting times...
Those wacky Somali pirates are at it again. What's interesting to me is the similarities between Somalia today and the Caribbean in the early 18th century.
The final heyday of Caribbean piracy was around 1710-1730. The European powers had previously been fighting a lengthy, global struggle known as the War of the Spanish Succession. At the end of the war, the powers hastily discharged hundreds of sailors in their Western colonies, creating a glut of men who knew how to fight and sail, but not much else. At the same time, an incredible amount of cargo - including gold, slaves, rum, and sugar - was passing through the Caribbean isles. As many of these isles were essentially lawless, pirate outposts quickly sprang up and buccaneers began to prey on all the rich merchant ships.
In Somalia, there are large numbers of unemployed men who fought in the decade-long civil war. Somalia itself remains the prime example of a failed state, and the government's power barely extends beyond Mogadishu. And billions of dollars in international cargo pass within sight of Somalia's coastline thanks to its proximity to the Suez Canal.
The critical factor that ended the age of buccaneering was the rise of the British Royal Navy as an international police force. But the Royal Navy didn't destroy the pirates at sea; they captured and occupied the pirate bases, like Nassau in the Bahamas. In 2009, it seems very unlikely that any government, including the U.S., would be willing to occupy Somalia to end the new age of piracy.
The final heyday of Caribbean piracy was around 1710-1730. The European powers had previously been fighting a lengthy, global struggle known as the War of the Spanish Succession. At the end of the war, the powers hastily discharged hundreds of sailors in their Western colonies, creating a glut of men who knew how to fight and sail, but not much else. At the same time, an incredible amount of cargo - including gold, slaves, rum, and sugar - was passing through the Caribbean isles. As many of these isles were essentially lawless, pirate outposts quickly sprang up and buccaneers began to prey on all the rich merchant ships.
In Somalia, there are large numbers of unemployed men who fought in the decade-long civil war. Somalia itself remains the prime example of a failed state, and the government's power barely extends beyond Mogadishu. And billions of dollars in international cargo pass within sight of Somalia's coastline thanks to its proximity to the Suez Canal.
The critical factor that ended the age of buccaneering was the rise of the British Royal Navy as an international police force. But the Royal Navy didn't destroy the pirates at sea; they captured and occupied the pirate bases, like Nassau in the Bahamas. In 2009, it seems very unlikely that any government, including the U.S., would be willing to occupy Somalia to end the new age of piracy.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
So you kinda liked Watchmen...
A few people have asked me to recommend comic books for them after reading Watchmen, which is kind of like asking someone to recommend movies for you after you've seen Casablanca. The question I always have to ask is, "well, what do you like?" If you're willing to do a little research, there's a comic book out there for you, and I don't just mean superheroes. There's Westerns, science fiction, crime drama, comedy, horror, autobiographies, romance, whatever you're interested in. And if you're in an international mood, you can find comics from the UK, France, Italy, Korea, Japan (lots and lots of stuff from Japan), and even far-away Canada!
After the so-so performance of Watchmen at the box office, DC Comics decided to release a list of comics aimed at older readers. You can look at their fancy website here. There are three problems with this list: it's too superhero-centric, it contains a lot of books that aren't actually good, and it only has books published by DC Comics (obviously).
But for those interested in getting their feet wet in comics, the After Watchmen list is as good a starting point as any. After trimming the fat, here's what I would put forth:
Saga of the Swamp Thing: Alan Moore is pretty much the only writer who ever did anything worthwhile with the character of Swamp Thing.
The Dark Knight Returns: Before Frank Miller became a walking parody of himself, he wrote really entertaining, noir-ish stories. This title effectively redefined Batman for an entire generation. You can see its influence in both the Tim Burton and Christopher Nolan Batman films.
All-Star Superman: a recent work by Grant Morrison, it comes close to being the Platonic ideal of a Superman comic, and for one brief instant I understood why some people really like the Big Blue Boy Scout.
Animal Man: an older work by Morrison in the same deconstructionist vein as Watchmen. It also touches upon animal rights and violence in mainstream entertainment.
V for Vendetta: don't let the movie fool you, this book by Alan Moore was really good (and very British). This also holds true for From Hell and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Actually, anything by Moore is probably worth checking out.
Transmetropolitan: don't care about superheroes? What about a story by Warren Ellis where a crazed, junkie journalist (essentially Hunter S. Thompson) fights a corrupt government in the future?
Y: The Last Man: High concept pitch by Brian K. Vaughn: every mammal with a Y chromosome dies one day, except for one wannabe illusionist and his pet monkey. Hijinks ensue.
Sandman: Neil Gaiman's massive dark fantasy about the Lord of Dreams and the art of storytelling.
Preacher: Did you ever feel like punching God in the face? Well, so did Garth Ennis, and this book reads like one long "fuck you" to Christianity, but along the way it tells an exciting adventure story with richly drawn-out characters.
This list isn't meant to be exhaustive, and there are other titles on the After Watchmen site that are worth checking out if these books get you interested. I'd also recommend looking at the websites for smaller publishers like Dark Horse, Image, IDW, Dynamite, Oni, Fantagraphics, and Drawn & Quarterly. And of course, there's Marvel if you want more superheroes.
After the so-so performance of Watchmen at the box office, DC Comics decided to release a list of comics aimed at older readers. You can look at their fancy website here. There are three problems with this list: it's too superhero-centric, it contains a lot of books that aren't actually good, and it only has books published by DC Comics (obviously).
But for those interested in getting their feet wet in comics, the After Watchmen list is as good a starting point as any. After trimming the fat, here's what I would put forth:
Saga of the Swamp Thing: Alan Moore is pretty much the only writer who ever did anything worthwhile with the character of Swamp Thing.
The Dark Knight Returns: Before Frank Miller became a walking parody of himself, he wrote really entertaining, noir-ish stories. This title effectively redefined Batman for an entire generation. You can see its influence in both the Tim Burton and Christopher Nolan Batman films.
All-Star Superman: a recent work by Grant Morrison, it comes close to being the Platonic ideal of a Superman comic, and for one brief instant I understood why some people really like the Big Blue Boy Scout.
Animal Man: an older work by Morrison in the same deconstructionist vein as Watchmen. It also touches upon animal rights and violence in mainstream entertainment.
V for Vendetta: don't let the movie fool you, this book by Alan Moore was really good (and very British). This also holds true for From Hell and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Actually, anything by Moore is probably worth checking out.
Transmetropolitan: don't care about superheroes? What about a story by Warren Ellis where a crazed, junkie journalist (essentially Hunter S. Thompson) fights a corrupt government in the future?
Y: The Last Man: High concept pitch by Brian K. Vaughn: every mammal with a Y chromosome dies one day, except for one wannabe illusionist and his pet monkey. Hijinks ensue.
Sandman: Neil Gaiman's massive dark fantasy about the Lord of Dreams and the art of storytelling.
Preacher: Did you ever feel like punching God in the face? Well, so did Garth Ennis, and this book reads like one long "fuck you" to Christianity, but along the way it tells an exciting adventure story with richly drawn-out characters.
This list isn't meant to be exhaustive, and there are other titles on the After Watchmen site that are worth checking out if these books get you interested. I'd also recommend looking at the websites for smaller publishers like Dark Horse, Image, IDW, Dynamite, Oni, Fantagraphics, and Drawn & Quarterly. And of course, there's Marvel if you want more superheroes.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Heroes is back, baby!
So the whiny losers on the Internet keep bitching that Heroes is no good. WELL YOU"RE WRONG!!1 Heroes is still the best show on TV, and this episode is proof of why. It's got tons of excitement and character stuff and Sylar being totally awesome.
Nathan rescues Claire and flies away from some government guys who want to capture her. And then they go to Mexico. And then Nathan gets drunk after making a bet or something with some vacationing frat boys, um... I'm not sure why, and so Claire has to win the bet for him! And since she heals and all, she can't get drunk, so she wins! But she still takes her shirt off...Hayden Panettiere is soooo hot. But here's the weird thing. I usually ship Claire and Peter, and yeah he's her uncle and all, but they are so perfect for each other. But now I'm totally a Nathan/Claire shipper.
And speaking of Peter, he hangs out in a church with his mom! And they spend like half an hour of the show in the church, and his mom keeps going on about how sorry she feels for sucking. It's really moving and stuff.
And we get some great scenes with Sylar plotting with the evil government guys. It's exactly like every Sylar scene the show's ever had, so you know it's awesome! And he still eats brains, cuz you know...AWESOME.
Only one problem with this episode...NO HIRO-CHAN! He's the friggin heart of the show, and it just doesn't feel right without Hiro-chan giving us a Yatta! Oh well, I'm sure next episode is going to rock even harder. SUCK IT, YOU HATERS!
Nathan rescues Claire and flies away from some government guys who want to capture her. And then they go to Mexico. And then Nathan gets drunk after making a bet or something with some vacationing frat boys, um... I'm not sure why, and so Claire has to win the bet for him! And since she heals and all, she can't get drunk, so she wins! But she still takes her shirt off...Hayden Panettiere is soooo hot. But here's the weird thing. I usually ship Claire and Peter, and yeah he's her uncle and all, but they are so perfect for each other. But now I'm totally a Nathan/Claire shipper.
And speaking of Peter, he hangs out in a church with his mom! And they spend like half an hour of the show in the church, and his mom keeps going on about how sorry she feels for sucking. It's really moving and stuff.
And we get some great scenes with Sylar plotting with the evil government guys. It's exactly like every Sylar scene the show's ever had, so you know it's awesome! And he still eats brains, cuz you know...AWESOME.
Only one problem with this episode...NO HIRO-CHAN! He's the friggin heart of the show, and it just doesn't feel right without Hiro-chan giving us a Yatta! Oh well, I'm sure next episode is going to rock even harder. SUCK IT, YOU HATERS!
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Why Video Games Don't Make Good Movies
With Prince of Persia: Sands of Time already in production, it seems that Hollywood has decided to go forward with even more video game adaptations. Here's why they won't work:
1. The Hollow Avatar: the protagonist of your average game is deliberately devoid of personality (e.g., Master Chief of Halo). In some cases, the protagonist doesn't even speak their own lines of dialogue. This hollow avatar design draws the player into the game by encouraging the projection of their own personality and voice onto the the main character. But when shifted to the medium of film, the hollow avatar comes across as nothing more than what it is; an empty character devoid of motivation or personality. This goes to the heart of how film, a passive form of entertainment, differs from games, an interactive form of entertainment.
2. Repetitive Risk-Taking: all games are essentially built around some type of risk-taking, whether it's jumping from one moving platform to another or shooting Nazis. Generally, this risk-taking is quite repetitive. Sure, game designers can shake things up a little with customizable characters, boss battles, diverse level design, and any number of other tricks, but at the end of the day most games are built around a risk-taking scenario that is repeated many times over. If a game is designed correctly, the player doesn't get bored because an element of danger is always present, in other words the player accepts the repetitiveness because the risk always feels genuine. Film, however, has a much more difficult time pulling off repetitive risk-taking scenarios, because the viewer is removed from the danger. A passive moviegoer will get bored very quickly watching a character face the same danger again and again and again. Repetitiveness lies at the core of games, but it is the death of film.
2. The Dying Factor: in games, you generally die a lot until you figure out what to do. In film, it's pretty unusual for a character to die and then get back up because they had an extra life. The dying factor helps to explain why the adaptation of the survival horror game Silent Hill, which was a beautifully shot horror film, was not in any way scary. In the game, the main character is solitary for most of the story. This isolation, combined with the fact that the character could get killed at any moment, adds tension to the gameplay. The film attempted to replicate this feature, and kept the main character isolated for much of its runtime. However, if you kill the main character, then the movie's basically over. Most viewers understand this, even if only on a subconscious level, which is why none of the dangers the character faced felt remotely scary. There was no believable way for her to die and the movie to go on. That's why most horror films have big casts, which translates into a high body count and uncertainty as to who will live.
Perhaps Prince of Persia will find a way to break the trend of crappy video game adaptations. But I'm not holding out much hope. There's only so many times you can watch a guy run along a wall.
1. The Hollow Avatar: the protagonist of your average game is deliberately devoid of personality (e.g., Master Chief of Halo). In some cases, the protagonist doesn't even speak their own lines of dialogue. This hollow avatar design draws the player into the game by encouraging the projection of their own personality and voice onto the the main character. But when shifted to the medium of film, the hollow avatar comes across as nothing more than what it is; an empty character devoid of motivation or personality. This goes to the heart of how film, a passive form of entertainment, differs from games, an interactive form of entertainment.
2. Repetitive Risk-Taking: all games are essentially built around some type of risk-taking, whether it's jumping from one moving platform to another or shooting Nazis. Generally, this risk-taking is quite repetitive. Sure, game designers can shake things up a little with customizable characters, boss battles, diverse level design, and any number of other tricks, but at the end of the day most games are built around a risk-taking scenario that is repeated many times over. If a game is designed correctly, the player doesn't get bored because an element of danger is always present, in other words the player accepts the repetitiveness because the risk always feels genuine. Film, however, has a much more difficult time pulling off repetitive risk-taking scenarios, because the viewer is removed from the danger. A passive moviegoer will get bored very quickly watching a character face the same danger again and again and again. Repetitiveness lies at the core of games, but it is the death of film.
2. The Dying Factor: in games, you generally die a lot until you figure out what to do. In film, it's pretty unusual for a character to die and then get back up because they had an extra life. The dying factor helps to explain why the adaptation of the survival horror game Silent Hill, which was a beautifully shot horror film, was not in any way scary. In the game, the main character is solitary for most of the story. This isolation, combined with the fact that the character could get killed at any moment, adds tension to the gameplay. The film attempted to replicate this feature, and kept the main character isolated for much of its runtime. However, if you kill the main character, then the movie's basically over. Most viewers understand this, even if only on a subconscious level, which is why none of the dangers the character faced felt remotely scary. There was no believable way for her to die and the movie to go on. That's why most horror films have big casts, which translates into a high body count and uncertainty as to who will live.
Perhaps Prince of Persia will find a way to break the trend of crappy video game adaptations. But I'm not holding out much hope. There's only so many times you can watch a guy run along a wall.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
We're all gonna die because the Japanese love robots
Battlestar Galactica: Daybreak Part 2
Not perfect by any means, but I enjoyed it. In fact, it may be the best series finale I've ever seen, even if it didn't give a giant, Sorpranos-style "fuck you" to the viewers.
Spoilers ahead...
The Good:
Space battles! Robot-on-robot violence! Might as well blow the entire budget on the last episode.
Adama's plan to rescue Hera was as ridiculous and suicidal as all his other plans. Not surprisingly, it worked.
After 4 seasons, Baltar finally grew a backbone and even came to terms with his self-loathing and secret shame over his roots. His story arc with Caprica Six was resolved in a way that gave both characters as much closure as they'll ever get. As usual, James Callis and Tricia Helfer were outstanding in their roles.
Boomer's long running, oft-forgotten subplot ended in the only way it ever could, and yet the character still managed to go out with dignity.
Cavil, on the other hand, died in a completely meaningless fashion, which suits a character who ultimately believed in nothing.
Real Earth! Ron Moore and company are a bunch of lying liars, and I admit I did not see this twist coming. Linking the colonial survivors to the origins of modern humanity and (I'm assuming) our ancient pagan traditions is a much cooler idea than simply having them land in Times Square.
Furby is the seed of our own destruction!
Hoshi got to be admiral for 5 minutes. Come on, that shit is funny.
Flashback Adama threw up on himself! That's how I'll always remember him.
The Bad:
So all that shit with the opera house and the angels was just some overly-elaborate plot by God to arrange a Mexican standoff on Galactica's bridge? It's almost as if God is a hack writer on a TV series.
Apollo gives one of his big, dumb speeches and they all turn into tree-hugging hippies. The fuck? And did the survivors really have to send the ENTIRE fleet into the sun? I'm typing this blog post on a computer while sitting in an air-conditioned house. Technology rocks, and Lee Adama is full of fail.
The flashbacks became as pointless as I feared they would. I liked the flashbacks in the first part, but the longer they went on the less useful they were in examining the characters. Did we really need another story about how Lee loves Kara but their relationship will never work? 4 seasons of stating the obvious was enough.
Tyrol avenging Cally should have been dramatic, but that plot hadn't been addressed in months, and Tory was given so little character development I didn't feel much of anything when Tyrol killed her.
Rosslyn was mostly a waste of space for 2 hours, and then she died. Not exactly making good use of your most talented actress.
Angel Kara was an idiotic idea. While the show had pretty much revealed God's hand a long time ago, at least everything God did was ambiguous and open to multiple interpretations (like Head-Six being either an angel or one of Baltar's hallucinations). But turning Kara into the deus ex machina was just lazy writing and pretty much misses the whole point of faith. And her schmaltzy last scene with Apollo only made it worse.
If I never hear "All Along the Watchtower" again, I'll be a happy man.
_______________________________________________________
So what did you think? Leave a comment.
Not perfect by any means, but I enjoyed it. In fact, it may be the best series finale I've ever seen, even if it didn't give a giant, Sorpranos-style "fuck you" to the viewers.
Spoilers ahead...
The Good:
Space battles! Robot-on-robot violence! Might as well blow the entire budget on the last episode.
Adama's plan to rescue Hera was as ridiculous and suicidal as all his other plans. Not surprisingly, it worked.
After 4 seasons, Baltar finally grew a backbone and even came to terms with his self-loathing and secret shame over his roots. His story arc with Caprica Six was resolved in a way that gave both characters as much closure as they'll ever get. As usual, James Callis and Tricia Helfer were outstanding in their roles.
Boomer's long running, oft-forgotten subplot ended in the only way it ever could, and yet the character still managed to go out with dignity.
Cavil, on the other hand, died in a completely meaningless fashion, which suits a character who ultimately believed in nothing.
Real Earth! Ron Moore and company are a bunch of lying liars, and I admit I did not see this twist coming. Linking the colonial survivors to the origins of modern humanity and (I'm assuming) our ancient pagan traditions is a much cooler idea than simply having them land in Times Square.
Furby is the seed of our own destruction!
Hoshi got to be admiral for 5 minutes. Come on, that shit is funny.
Flashback Adama threw up on himself! That's how I'll always remember him.
The Bad:
So all that shit with the opera house and the angels was just some overly-elaborate plot by God to arrange a Mexican standoff on Galactica's bridge? It's almost as if God is a hack writer on a TV series.
Apollo gives one of his big, dumb speeches and they all turn into tree-hugging hippies. The fuck? And did the survivors really have to send the ENTIRE fleet into the sun? I'm typing this blog post on a computer while sitting in an air-conditioned house. Technology rocks, and Lee Adama is full of fail.
The flashbacks became as pointless as I feared they would. I liked the flashbacks in the first part, but the longer they went on the less useful they were in examining the characters. Did we really need another story about how Lee loves Kara but their relationship will never work? 4 seasons of stating the obvious was enough.
Tyrol avenging Cally should have been dramatic, but that plot hadn't been addressed in months, and Tory was given so little character development I didn't feel much of anything when Tyrol killed her.
Rosslyn was mostly a waste of space for 2 hours, and then she died. Not exactly making good use of your most talented actress.
Angel Kara was an idiotic idea. While the show had pretty much revealed God's hand a long time ago, at least everything God did was ambiguous and open to multiple interpretations (like Head-Six being either an angel or one of Baltar's hallucinations). But turning Kara into the deus ex machina was just lazy writing and pretty much misses the whole point of faith. And her schmaltzy last scene with Apollo only made it worse.
If I never hear "All Along the Watchtower" again, I'll be a happy man.
_______________________________________________________
So what did you think? Leave a comment.
What If..."Twilight" was re-made for scrawny Swedish boys?
Let the Right One In (2008)
Directed by Tomas Alfredson
Written by John Lindqvist
made in Sweden
Starring
Kare Hedebrant (Oskar)
Lina Leandersson (Eli)
Let the Right One In is the film adaptation of a novel also written by Lindqvist. Set in the early 1980s, the story focuses on a wimpy, 12-year-old boy named Oskar who lives with his mother in the working class town of Blackeberg. Bookish and isolated from his classmates, Oskar is regularly picked on by a group of bullies and spends his evenings fantasizing about revenge. This seemingly mundane story takes on a supernatural dimension when a mysterious, androgynous girl named Eli moves in next door. Her older male companion begins to kill people and drain them of blood, and it quickly becomes apparent that Eli is a vampire. But even a little bloodsucking can't get in the way of a blossoming romance between two adolescents. The title is a reference to a bit of vampire lore that says that vampires cannot enter a home unless they're invited.
On a superficial level, this movie is cut from the same cloth as Twilight. It's a dark, moody romance starring a social outcast who falls in love with a vampire. The similarities end there, as Let the Right One In is both a more daring story and a far more impressive film. The script touches upon a number of sexual taboos that would likely have made it unfilmable in the U.S. The relationship between Eli and her male companion, Hakan, is never explained but there are strong suggestions of paedophilia, or some type of quid pro quo for his aid in obtaining blood. The movie also toys with definitions of sexuality and orientation. There is a brief, but rather shocking, scene late in the film that explains why Eli is rather androgynous-looking. Another aspect of the story that would likely have scared away American producers is the violence. While the movie is not particular gorey, quite a bit of the violence involves children, especially during the blood-soaked climax.
Alfredson's direction is, for the most part, superb. I've never been to Sweden, but this film is the enemy of Swedish tourism. Alfredson portrays the Swedish winter as this oppressive veil of snow and gloom that is present throughout the movie. Gorgeous wide-shots capture the natural beauty of the Swedish countryside, but it is always covered in a layer of ice. Most of these outdoor scenes are filmed using deep focus, giving the viewer an expansive view. However, many of the indoor scenes use shallow focus, creating a sense of claustrophobia, particularly inside the cramped, Soviet-style apartments. Many of the nighttime scenes are especially well-done, and Alfredson makes excellent use of contrast and dark space. Admittedly, much of my appreciation for the film's beauty may be due to seeing it on Blu-Ray. This is a far better advertisement for a getting a PS3 than any game Sony has put out.
The only real problems with the film are the sometimes overly-awkward acting by the Kare Hedebrant (Oskar) and some poorly done CGI involving cats. But neither of these issues detract from the film's strengths.
I highly recommend this film, but suggest watching it with subtitles, as the English dub is rotten.
Directed by Tomas Alfredson
Written by John Lindqvist
made in Sweden
Starring
Kare Hedebrant (Oskar)
Lina Leandersson (Eli)
Let the Right One In is the film adaptation of a novel also written by Lindqvist. Set in the early 1980s, the story focuses on a wimpy, 12-year-old boy named Oskar who lives with his mother in the working class town of Blackeberg. Bookish and isolated from his classmates, Oskar is regularly picked on by a group of bullies and spends his evenings fantasizing about revenge. This seemingly mundane story takes on a supernatural dimension when a mysterious, androgynous girl named Eli moves in next door. Her older male companion begins to kill people and drain them of blood, and it quickly becomes apparent that Eli is a vampire. But even a little bloodsucking can't get in the way of a blossoming romance between two adolescents. The title is a reference to a bit of vampire lore that says that vampires cannot enter a home unless they're invited.
On a superficial level, this movie is cut from the same cloth as Twilight. It's a dark, moody romance starring a social outcast who falls in love with a vampire. The similarities end there, as Let the Right One In is both a more daring story and a far more impressive film. The script touches upon a number of sexual taboos that would likely have made it unfilmable in the U.S. The relationship between Eli and her male companion, Hakan, is never explained but there are strong suggestions of paedophilia, or some type of quid pro quo for his aid in obtaining blood. The movie also toys with definitions of sexuality and orientation. There is a brief, but rather shocking, scene late in the film that explains why Eli is rather androgynous-looking. Another aspect of the story that would likely have scared away American producers is the violence. While the movie is not particular gorey, quite a bit of the violence involves children, especially during the blood-soaked climax.
Alfredson's direction is, for the most part, superb. I've never been to Sweden, but this film is the enemy of Swedish tourism. Alfredson portrays the Swedish winter as this oppressive veil of snow and gloom that is present throughout the movie. Gorgeous wide-shots capture the natural beauty of the Swedish countryside, but it is always covered in a layer of ice. Most of these outdoor scenes are filmed using deep focus, giving the viewer an expansive view. However, many of the indoor scenes use shallow focus, creating a sense of claustrophobia, particularly inside the cramped, Soviet-style apartments. Many of the nighttime scenes are especially well-done, and Alfredson makes excellent use of contrast and dark space. Admittedly, much of my appreciation for the film's beauty may be due to seeing it on Blu-Ray. This is a far better advertisement for a getting a PS3 than any game Sony has put out.
The only real problems with the film are the sometimes overly-awkward acting by the Kare Hedebrant (Oskar) and some poorly done CGI involving cats. But neither of these issues detract from the film's strengths.
I highly recommend this film, but suggest watching it with subtitles, as the English dub is rotten.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)