Sarge 2.0 goes to the movies!

[Sarge 2.0]

This thread is intended as a review/discussion thread. Most of the reviews that will get posted here are reviews I've written for or will submit to my University paper. Let's start with my personal favorite, my review of Let the Right One In:

Is there anything more frightening than a child who must act violently out of necessity, whose very nature is violent? Or a child whose life is so steeped in loneliness, neglect, and sorrow that violence is an inevitable outcome? Two such children populate the world of Tomas Alfredson's "Let the Right One In." One is twelve, and the other is twelve…more or less. She has just been twelve for a very long time.

Adapted from a novel of the same name by John Ajvide Lindqvist, "Let the Right One In" is an oddly touching, often disturbing Swedish film that has already been described by some as "Twilight" as directed by Ingmar Bergman. Like "Twilight," "Let the Right One In" is adapted from a novel. It is also the story of a relationship between a vampire and a human, but the similarities end there.

Where "Twilight" relies on trite gimmickry, "Let the Right One In" presents its vampire with startling gravitas. It does what all good horror movies must do, something that has become a rarity for horror movies today: it takes its monster seriously, and causes us to feel for its monster and attempt to understand the monsters actions. "Let the Right One In" is directed with the same artistry and elegance as "Pan's Labyrinth" or "May," and it is undoubtedly one of the best-and at the very least the most original and haunting-films of the year.

"Let the Right One In" tells the story of Oskar (KÃ¥re Hedebrant), a lonely little boy living in Sweden who is viciously bullied by a group of children at school. The leader of the bullies is a sadistic little brute who coerces other children to participate in the bullying even if they don't want to, leaving them just as traumatized as Oskar. At night, Oskar dreams of revenge, standing in front of his mirror with a knife, he fantasizes of stabbing the bullies to death and taunting them with the same insults that they hurl towards him day after day. But Oskar is far too meek to act upon his fantasies, and he does not gain much support or comfort from his neglectful but not wholly unloving mother.

Soon a girl and an older man move in to the apartment next door, and become the talk of the neighborhood gossips. The pretty but peculiar girl is named Eli (Lina Leandersson), who only seems to come outside at night. She first greets Oskar when he is acting out one of his revenge fantasies on a tree, stabbing it and cursing it like the bullies who haunt him.

The first thing she tells Oskar is "we can't be friends," and it is here that we begin to understand that Eli is also painfully lonely, but unlike Oskar, her loneliness is somehow necessary. She leaves with a strange older man named HÃ¥kan (Per Ragnar), who as it turns out is a serial killer that knocks his victims unconscious then strings them upside down, slits their throat, and drains their blood in to a jug.

The murders soon become town gossip as well, and the strange old man with his oddly pale, seemingly nocturnal "daughter" look increasingly suspicious. In spite of her earlier warning, Eli and Oskar soon strike up a surprising friendship. Oskar notices that she smells funny-like a corpse-and for some reason she isn't bothered by the freezing cold.

Eli soon begins to urge him to fight back against the bullies, saying, "Hit back…hard. Harder than you'd ever dare. And then they'll stop." Oskar actually takes her advice, retaliating with startling violence, which is met with resounding approval from Eli.

At one point Eli and Oskar lay in bed together nude, but their relationship is completely asexual, they are too young to have a concept of love that is complicated by sex or even gender identification, making their love somehow more pure.

In regards to gender, when Oskar asks if Eli would like to go steady with him, she admits to him gently, "Oskar, I'm not a girl." He doesn't mind, since to him their love exists regardless of gender; Oskar's pre-pubescent innocence is not yet spoiled by the messy trials and tribulations of puberty.

Oskar soon realizes what Eli means when she says that she's not a girl, as he witnesses her undressing at one point and sees that she has a scar in place of genitalia, perhaps indicating that she was a girl when she was human, but no longer.

When the body count begins to rise, Oskar slowly puts the pieces of the puzzle together, and asks whether or not Eli is a vampire. She hesitates, as if to be uncomfortable with the label of vampire, replying simply with "I live of blood, yes." Oskar asks if she is dead, and she tells him, "I'm twelve. I've just been twelve for a very long time."

Here is where "Let the Right One In" truly stands out from its contemporaries, where "Twilight" relishes in the now hackneyed Hollywood portrayal of vampirism, "Let the Right One In" treats its vampire incredibly seriously, so seriously that the word is only ever used once during the entire movie.

When Eli avoids calling herself a vampire, the film effectively avoids being pigeonholed as another cheesy vampire movie. The film also pays tribute to the old folkloric tradition that a vampire cannot enter a room unless invited, which explains the title.

Alfredson shoots the film beautifully, and every shot of the somber Swedish snowfall is breathtaking. The beautiful moodiness compliments the internal strife of its characters, which are living in despair and attempting to find comfort in one another. Appropriately, many of the characters are very pale, and their skin comes in stark contrast to the sanguine blood that splatters the film.

Make no mistake though, "Let the Right One In" is a horror film that certainly has its share of scares, and there's plenty of gore to go around. The film ends with a scene of brutal violence that takes place mostly off screen, but from what is shown, we're thankful that we don't get to witness it.

But the violence that closes the film might be the scariest aspect of it. It is violence that occurs solely among a group of prepubescent children, who act brutally because they are pushed to do so out of the sadness that characterizes their very existence. "Let the Right One In" will not make as much money as "Twilight"-although the already scheduled Hollywood remake might-but it is certainly the most haunting, poignant, and fiercely original film of 2008.

[Star]

Good review. I actually haven't seen this movie yet though. I feel like the parts about them lying nude together and her scar instead of genitalia was a little bit unnecessary though...

[Star]

(Just because they felt like small parts of the movie that didn't need to be mentioned?)

[Sarge 2.0]

How so? Do you think it was a little too much plot?

I need to work on my plot exposition stuff, but sometimes when I really get in to it I end up writing a lot about certain scenes.

And thanks.

[Star]

Well I'm not sure because like I said I haven't seen it but it just seemed like a random part thrown in or something... Maybe I should see it first haha.

[Sarge 2.0]

Haha well from my perspective those two scenes were pretty important. You might feel differently, what with it being a subjective experience and all.

[Episode29]

Yeah, I agree with Star in regards to over-emphasis on plot synopsis. There are two ways to go. As you are writing reviews, you want to stick to a rough outline of what the film is so as to allow the casual reader to understand what the film is about. By throwing in specific details about the gender dynamics and sexuality, people may quickly get put off or confused, and thus dismissively decide the film "isn't for them". My rule, which I use when writing reviews for my own University paper, is to try to fit all the exposition stuff into two paragraphs max. The rest should focus on the film at hand, however you can focus in on smaller details within the critical part of the review.

You can check out one of my reviews at my blog link below if you want. Not to say my way is better or anything, but to give you a possible option for how to approach the plot detail stuff (The least enjoyable part of writing reviews, I have to admit) or potentially allow you to say "I hate the way he does that, but perhaps this (new idea) would work better...".

[Hunter Rider]

I haven't seen the movie but your review has ensured I will be picking it up.

I thought it was very well written, personally I am not a fan of to much story in a review and i thought you navigated that pitfall smoothly, the scenes you highlighted gave me a sense of the tone and artistic nature of the movie without bogging down your overall thoughts on the actual execution.

I am not sure I'd have used the last part as it kinda reveals the ending, albeit I am not sure exactly who has committed the final act of violence.

[Sarge 2.0]

Originally Posted by Episode29

Yeah, I agree with Star in regards to over-emphasis on plot synopsis. There are two ways to go. As you are writing reviews, you want to stick to a rough outline of what the film is so as to allow the casual reader to understand what the film is about. By throwing in specific details about the gender dynamics and sexuality, people may quickly get put off or confused, and thus dismissively decide the film "isn't for them". My rule, which I use when writing reviews for my own University paper, is to try to fit all the exposition stuff into two paragraphs max. The rest should focus on the film at hand, however you can focus in on smaller details within the critical part of the review.

You can check out one of my reviews at my blog link below if you want. Not to say my way is better or anything, but to give you a possible option for how to approach the plot detail stuff (The least enjoyable part of writing reviews, I have to admit) or potentially allow you to say "I hate the way he does that, but perhaps this (new idea) would work better...".

If they're put off by my discussing that then so be it, but they would have been just as put off by it if they went ahead and saw the movie without knowing those scenes were in there. If anything, I think it would be better for the reader to know about that stuff before seeing the movie.

In any case, I subscribe to the Ebert philosophy that a movie review should communicate the critic's experience with the film (i.e. what the critic liked or disliked about the film and why) and it's up to the reader to judge whether or not they will have the same experience upon viewing it.

[Sarge 2.0]

Originally Posted by Hunter Rider

I haven't seen the movie but your review has ensured I will be picking it up.

I thought it was very well written, personally I am not a fan of to much story in a review and i thought you navigated that pitfall smoothly, the scenes you highlighted gave me a sense of the tone and artistic nature of the movie without bogging down your overall thoughts on the actual execution.

I am not sure I'd have used the last part as it kinda reveals the ending, albeit I am not sure exactly who has committed the final act of violence.

Thanks hunter, I appreciate the feedback.

Honestly I was torn over talking about the ending in my review while I was writing it. I decided that the ending was so powerful that it was worth noting as part of the experience of the film, and for obvious reasons I excluded explicit detail.

[Episode29]

Originally Posted by Sarge 2.0

If they're put off by my discussing that then so be it, but they would have been just as put off by it if they went ahead and saw the movie without knowing those scenes were in there. If anything, I think it would be better for the reader to know about that stuff before seeing the movie.

In any case, I subscribe to the Ebert philosophy that a movie review should communicate the critic's experience with the film (i.e. what the critic liked or disliked about the film and why) and it's up to the reader to judge whether or not they will have the same experience upon viewing it.

Right, a valid example. However, there is a difference between communicating an experience and reciting plot points. Like Ebert, I would recommend mixing a little more critical analysis into your summary.

Again, I'm not trying to sound like a Negative Nancy, as I do think you are good writer, just trying to add some constructive criticism. I've always found in the past the people only giving me good feedback leads to bad habits on my part.

[Sarge 2.0]

Originally Posted by Episode29

Right, a valid example. However, there is a difference between communicating an experience and reciting plot points. Like Ebert, I would recommend mixing a little more critical analysis into your summary.

Again, I'm not trying to sound like a Negative Nancy, as I do think you are good writer, just trying to add some constructive criticism. I've always found in the past the people only giving me good feedback leads to bad habits on my part.

It's ok, I'm always worrying about my "plot problem" it's something I try to work on with each review. Sometimes I get a little too caught up with theme and forget to discuss other things about the film.

[DBella]

Well... I must say that I appreciate the first choice of film to be reviewed in this thread for it's on my "MUST SEE" list. A few days before the GGs, I had watched a 'film review' show and this is one of the film featured and upon seeing the trailer, I was enthralled.

Now, on to your review! I thought it was very well written. I appreciate your prespective on the film. Yes, you got quite into detail with the plot analysis but that doesn't bother me. I didn't get the feeling of you telling me whether I should like or dislike the film, like some film reviews do. What I got was, "this film is worth seeing".

Your last paragraph touched upon the non-supernatural scary aspect of the film and, I think, that prompts the reader, to keep in mind that when watching the film, that there are other scary things to look for in the film other than the vampire.

I'd say it's a pretty good review.

[Sarge 2.0]

Thanks Bella.

Yeah, I definitely avoid the "You'll like this!" approach because, frankly, it makes for bad criticism.

And the non-supernatural aspects of LTROI are undoubtedly the most disturbing. I hope you're not bothered by gore, because there's a fair amount of that in the film.

[DBella]

If you had seen "Towelhead", I hope you'll review it soon. I've not seen it but I've heard about the book and thought the subject to be interesting. Seen the trailer and it looks good, pretty disturbing, but good.

[Sarge 2.0]

I haven't seen it, I've heard that the film was unpleasant and handled the material poorly and without tact. But I'm still going to check it out I think so that I can decide what I think.

[Hunter Rider]

Originally Posted by Sarge 2.0

Thanks hunter, I appreciate the feedback.

Honestly I was torn over talking about the ending in my review while I was writing it. I decided that the ending was so powerful that it was worth noting as part of the experience of the film, and for obvious reasons I excluded explicit detail.

I get where you are coming from, the journey the reviewer goes on with the movie is one of the most important aspects of the review, so if you felt that strongly about it I can see the reasoning to include it.

I just saw Slumdog Millionaire today, I recall you liked it, have you written a full review for it ?

[DBella]

I think it's always best to decide for yourself rather than let others decide for you. This is usually the reason I AVOID reading film reviews before watching a film because some reviewers do try to persuade you to go one way or another.

[Sarge 2.0]

Nope because of the time I saw it I never got to write a review officially, but I might write one for the Hype. What did you think of it?

[DBella]

Originally Posted by Hunter Rider

I get where you are coming from, the journey the reviewer goes on with the movie is one of the most important aspects of the review, so if you felt that strongly about it I can see the reasoning to include it.

Right on the money! At least that's how I see it too.

I just saw Slumdog Millionaire today, I recall you liked it, have you written a full review for it ?

Ooh! I can't wait to read Sarge's review on this one. I've watched a few very good made-in-India films (ie. the setting being in India) and I am quite a fan of A.R. Rahman.

[Star]

Slumdog Millionaire= Cheap plagiarized version of City Of God

[Hunter Rider]

Originally Posted by Sarge 2.0

Nope because of the time I saw it I never got to write a review officially, but I might write one for the Hype. What did you think of it?

My review is in my sig and the Slumdog thread, I was really won over by it as I was not really interested in it beforehand. I think Boyle did a quite superb job as it was a masterclass in storytelling above all else.

Originally Posted by DBella

Right on the money! At least that's how I see it too.


Ooh! I can't wait to read Sarge's review on this one. I've watched a few very good made-in-India films (ie. the setting being in India) and I am quite a fan of A.R. Rahman.

You will love it Bella, It has a number of elements I think you'll greatly enjoy.

[Sarge 2.0]

Originally Posted by Star

Slumdog Millionaire= Cheap plagiarized version of City Of God

Parallels could be drawn, but Slumdog was based off of a book called "Q and A". I hardly felt as though I was watching City of God during Slumdog, and I only noticed the similarities a few weeks later after thinking about Slumdog for a while.

[Star]

Hmm. I found them very similiar including the way they were shot but that's just me.

But I DID find that millionaire host to be hilarious. "Are you SURE it's not B?"

[Sarge 2.0]

Oh he was hilarious. I figured you'd like Slumdog since it had Paper Planes in it.