I finally saw this last night, and it was fucking brilliant. I don’t normally like subtitled films, but I had heard good things about this one. I expected it to be pretty good, but the thing was great.
That should cover the mouse over for spoilers.
My question is this: There is a scene where Jakob peeks in on Eli while she’s changing clothes and we see that she doesn’t have a vagina - just a surgical scar that runs horizontally. She had said earlier, “I’m not a girl”. At the time, you just assume she means that she is a vampire and no longer a child. However, the surgical scar makes it look like she was once a boy and had all of his/her genitalia removed. That’s not a simple eunuch - even the penis is gone. Why? Is there even an answer, or is this just something to keep the audience wondering what kind of screwed up past this girl had?
Note to those who haven’t seen the film: I know talking about a 12 year olds’ genitalia may seem a bit skeevy, but there is zero pedophilia vibes to the scene. There were no sexual overtones to that brief scene whatsoever.
It’s made clear in the book - Eli is revealed to be short for Elias. The vampire who infected him 200 years ago (that vampirism is due to a form of infection is also made clearer) removed his genitals, and he has been (un)living as a girl ever since. Apparently, the plan was to include more of Eli’s backstory in the movie, but it was edited down, and that shot was one of a few little pieces that was left in and unexplained.
I loved the movie, but the book is absolutely worth reading - there’s a lot more to the characterization, the bullies are humanized, Eli’s monstrosity is laid more bare, and there’s a subplot regarding Eli’s caretaker Hakan that is completely cut out. (hint: he doesn’t exactly die when he falls out of that window.) Still, I thought the movie was a great adaptation, and what was cut out and left mysterious doesn’t really detract from it.
Since my question in the OP has been answered, I’d like to open the thread up for any discussion related to the film.
One thing I’m curious about is the Hollywood adaptation. Is it any good? I’m a touch skeptical that Hollywood could refrain from either over-sympathizing Eli, throwing in to much CGI and gore, or wandering too much into melodrama. Let the Right One In worked so well because it was so stark. Even the setting was just snow and ice, and nothing but snow and ice. I’m not sure Hollywood could give it the same desolate feel.
The Hollywood version is good too, in my opinion. They also leave out Abby’s (that’s her name in the movie) caretaker’s backstory, and what happens to him after he falls out the window, and in my opinion made Abby less concerned about her actions, whereas Eli seemed truly horrified by what she was doing. Also, the Hollywood version takes out some of the more boring (to me) scenes that the original has.
Neither movie goes into the fact that Eli/Abby can shapeshift (she forms batwings to fly and grows claws on her hands and feet to climb). I recommend reading the book, it’s great.
Actually, there is a shot in “Let Me In” that illuminates the caretaker’s (called ‘The Father’ in the credits) backstory. When Owen visits Abby’s apartment he sees a strip of photo booth pictures depicting Abby, looking as she does today, with a younger version of the caretaker. This implies that the caretaker joined up with Abby when he was around Owen’s age. This adds an aspect to the story that was not in the original movie and is contradictory to the origin of the relationship as explained in the book.
I’m nearly certain that in Let Me In (the Hollywood version), there’s a sound of flapping wings in the pool scene. But if it is there, it’s very subtle (and nearly lost among the sound of other … things happening).
I saw the original Swedish version in the theater (before reading the book) and was too dumbstruck during the pool scene to notice whether there were sounds of wings flapping.
In both, though, the effort of bodies being dragged through the pool (seen blurrily in the background) could only be accomplished by something airborne.
I love-love-love the fact that the flying ability was only implied – added to the extraordinary power of that scene in both movies.
I can only add my recommendations to the list: see both movies, read the book, get the T-shirt.
Are you sure that wasn’t also implied in the Swedish film? Because that’s exactly what I thought when I first watched it. That the relationship between Eli and Hakan started the same way as between Eli and Oscar, and that Oscar would grow up to be the “new” Hakan.
You could extrapolate that Hakan and Eli had been together since he was a boy from the film, though as DigitalC says, the film doesn’t imply this.
In my opinion, you cannot say that Oskar will grow into the new Hakan. Hakan’s only value to Eli was as a provider and caretaker. I think the film makes it clear that, perhaps for the first time in his/her miserable life, in Oskar, Eli has found someone she really connects with. That these two outsiders have found soul mates is the crux of the story. This new relationship is very different from the old one.
I guess that doesn’t rule out that Oskar could end up running those unpleasant errands when he’s older. But for now, he’d be worse at it than Hakan.
I believe that “Let the Right One In” is a film that resonates very strongly and very personally with some people. I’m one of those people. I think it is one of the best movies anybody has ever made.
I saw both, and thought the remake was excellent, well worth seeing both for fans of the first, and people who were intrigued but ‘don’t like subtitles.’ They set it in the New Mexican high country where it is dry enough to be barren, and high enough for winter snows. I thought that worked well.
No “Let the Right One In” thread should exist without the two customary words of warning about the DVD for first time viewers.
Make sure you watch the version which has the THEATRICAL subtitles, not the dumbed down subtitles on the first American DVD release. Look for the words “Subtitles: Theatrical” on the back of the box. You can read the sorry story here: