Cloverfield Director To Remake Let The Right One In

[dark_b]

i think even if it was promoted better a lot of people would still think it sucked. the masses are used to fast paced action packed ''horror '' movies.

they are not used anymore to slow movies with suspense.

thats why a lot of people who see Alien for the first time think its boring. after all the modern slasher movies they can not accept a slow movie that has a build up.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

True...Hitchcock would probably fail today.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Can't believe I'm just now hearing about this. Especially since I haunt a comic book forum.

Last month, we brought you the news that "Let Me In," the upcoming remake of Swedish vampire film "Let The Right One In," was getting a comic book prequel. Now we have your first, exclusive look at sketches from interior artist Patric Reynolds featuring Abby (played by Chloe Moretz), and various other characters from the four-issue miniseries "Let Me In: Crossroads." Written by Marc Andreyko ("Torso," "Manhunter") with interior art from Reynolds ("Serenity: Float Out") and covers by Sean Phillips ("Sleeper"), "Let Me In: Crossroads" hits shelves in December from Dark Horse Comics. Read on for the official synopsis from Dark Horse, and eight (count 'em, eight!) brand new character sketches from Reynolds.

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2010/08/02/let-me-in-comic-book-prequel-character-sketches/

I'll be in line for this one!

 

[kedrell]

Cool, I'll be picking up the prequel comic when it comes out.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Ridley Scott weighs in:

"I haven't been frightened by a movie in a long time. This hits the spot. Don't watch it alone." ~ Ridley Scott on #LetMeIn

http://***********/#!/hammerfilms/statuses/5700122142838784

 

[flickchick85]

Ok, that's awesome. Because when I try to describe to people how Let Me In was different from most contemporary horror, I often use Alien vs. Aliens to help illustrate the point (Let Me In being Alien in this scenario, of course). So I love that Mr. Alien himself approved, haha.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Mark Kermode summed this up pefectly.

[YT]3l1c2WHTSCQ[/YT]

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Mark Kermode summed this up pefectly.

He actually summed himself up perfectly.

A guy that was mad about LMI before it was released and is in no way objective about it. He started out giving an opinion and proceeded to invalidate it. He's actually angry that LMI got such good reviews...as if the critical community let him down in his crusade against it. He couldn't even conceive of a situation where he could ok a person watching LMI.

He apparently has some weird idea that LMI has had a negative effect on LTROI (when the exact opposite has been the case). I invite him to open up his DVD of LTROI...it's still exactly the same. If he's worried that the superior acting in LMI will make LTROI look bad, I doubt anyone will hold that against the first movie.

Love his arrogant insinuation that a person who doesn't care for subtitles is somehow too stupid to understand the story. There are legitimate reasons to prefer non-subtitled movies. http://accurapid.com/journal/30subtitling.htm

Mark Kermode doesn't own the story. John Ajvide Lindqvist does (he wrote both the novel and the screenplay for LTROI)....and he loved LMI. So stacking JAL, Steven King, and Ridley Scott's opinion of LMI next to Kermode renders his as impotent as Pope Benedict XVI.

I also question whether Kermode has actually seen LMI since all the major characters are substantially different in this version. Kermode also might want to note the first movie didn't invent the story...it's all in the novel. If it's "wrong" to not want to read subtitles, it's just as wrong to not want to read the book. The first movie didn't "need to exist" either, bro.

And I hope those who read the book bothered to learn Swedish....the English language translation is just for lazy people. (The book is actually pretty great)

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

He actually summed himself up perfectly.

A guy that was mad about LMI before it was released and is in no way objective about it.

This was immediately after seeing it. Objectively talking about remakes. Withholding judgment. Wanting his viewers to see it with an open mind.

[YT]BwmvRdnwPdc[/YT]

In retrospect. Thinking about it.

[YT]3l1c2WHTSCQ[/YT]

Seems pretty objective (as well as bang on the mark) to me.
Kermode is a top critic, a guy who knows what he's talking about.

Mark Kermode doesn't own the story. John Ajvide Lindqvist does (he wrote both the novel and the screenplay for LTROI)....and he loved LMI. So stacking JAL, Steven King, and Ridley Scott's opinion of LMI next to Kermode renders his as impotent as Pope Benedict XVI.

Why would it render his opinion impotent?
He's judging it as a movie, as a movie critic, who has studied movies, specifically horrors. Movies, not novel or screenplays. It's not like Ridley Scott hasn't put out stinkers. Or Steven King, as well as making bold and with hindsight incorrect statements. ""I have seen the future of horror, his name is Clive Barker". Yep, he sure wasn't. I'd be very surprised if there actual knowledge of movies as a whole is as in depth as Kermodes. As for John Ajvide Lindqvist, Alan Moore wrote "V for Vendetta". Mark Kermode went against him (to his face) and defended the film, regardless of Alan Moore creating it. On the other hand, Mark Kermode hated "The Watchmen". As evident by that, I doubt he really cares if the person who created the source material likes or dislikes.

 

[dark_b]

i watched 10 video on youtube from Mark Kermode. its entertaining to watch him talk about movies.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Why would it render his opinion impotent?
He's judging it as a movie, as a movie critic, who has studied movies, specifically horrors. Movies, not novel or screenplays. It's not like Ridley Scott hasn't put out stinkers. Or Steven King, as well as making bold and with hindsight incorrect statements. ""I have seen the future of horror, his name is Clive Barker". Yep, he sure wasn't. I'd be very surprised if there actual knowledge of movies as a whole is as in depth as Kermodes. As for John Ajvide Lindqvist, Alan Moore wrote "V for Vendetta". Mark Kermode went against him (to his face) and defended the film, regardless of Alan Moore creating it. On the other hand, Mark Kermode hated "The Watchmen". As evident by that, I doubt he really cares if the person who created the source material likes or dislikes.

1-Now we're talking about something different. He's entitled to his opinion. That is different that saying he "summed it up" (i.e. his opinion is the right one). He isn't the only "top critic" in the world. And when it comes to opinions, his pales in comparison to Scott and King.
2-True that both Scott and King have made mistakes. Which also means that Kermode makes mistakes too. If he hated Watchmen that means he makes mistakes quite often.
3-"Those who can't do, teach....those who can't teach, become critics". I highly doubt he knows more about film than Ridley Scott. We could give Kermode 50 years and unlimited resources and he isn't going to ever produce an Alien or Blade Runner. And he's also welcome to try to write a horror novel that could compare with King's best. I'll bet against him.

Kermode is a top critic, a guy who knows what he's talking about.

I submit he doesn't know what he is talking about on this one. He is claiming there isn't any difference between the movies and there is. I saw LTROI first also and it's easy to see. Not one of the main characters is the same. LMI is shot more intimately. Music is used in a different way. Entire subplots are eliminated or altered.

His rant screams "agenda".

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Another one to grate the nerves of the "remake haters":

"Let the Right One In" is Jakob Hultcrantz Hansson's first directing assignment in Uppsala City Theatre. He works as an actor and director and has long been a permanent member of the ensemble of Västanå Theatre. Right now he is up to date as "Ulf" in Daniel Espinosa upcoming feature film "The condemned" which is broadcast on SVT Christmas 2010th Uppsala residents can also see him as Levin in "Anna Karenina" and the "Nasty Mans" here in Uppsala City Theatre in the spring.

http://www.uppsalastadsteater.se/2010/lat-den-ratte-komma-in/

Although, since this is Swedish, the common element present in this one will be absent. "America sucks!" (Coincidence that so many LMI haters bring that into it?)

 

[CrimsonMist]

Mark Kermode has this huge hard-on of hatred for John Boorman simply because John Boorman made The Exorcist II, which he felt, trashed The Exorcist, his favorite film ever, in some horrific, traumatizing way. He thinks it is the worst film ever made, ever(which is complete b.s. It's not good, but it isn't awful. Hell, Scorsese likes it.) and he has this lunatic theory that Boorman made both The Exorcist II and Zardoz because Boorman had it in my mind that he was some sort of brilliant autuer who thought he was above horror and sci-fi.

If any film critic ever needed a firm kick to the face, it's Mark Kermode.

 

[ALP]

Kermode is a bit of a plonker. I saw him interview Spielberg for that long special and all he did was suck up as much as he possibly could. And hearing that he hated Watchmen completely invalidates his opinion for me LOL

Anyway I have yet to see Let Me In and I know going in that I will not like it as much as I did the first film. However, from what I have read and the reviews...I'm sure I will still like it quite a bit.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

And when it comes to opinions, his pales in comparison to Scott and King

If he hated Watchmen that means he makes mistakes quite often.

Alan Moore has had pretty big achievements, yet, he practically hates every movie adapted from his material, many of which, he refuses to watch or have anything to do with, including the Watchman, he specifically didn't want his name associated with it and commented that he cursed Zack Snyder. He is by far lauded, better respected, and far more known than Kermode by comparison. As well as that, he is quite clearly deliberately small minded in comparison to Kermode when it comes to views on his own adapted creations.

1(i.e. his opinion is the right one)

Oh, I wasn't saying that, I can understand if it was put across wrongly as a statement, I agree with him 100% on that it's only really good when it is emulating (Swedish) Let the Right One in lacking the subtlety which made the original great. The CGI comment also seemed to ring true. I don't get the point of seeing it either, it's out on DVD. Presumably, the reason it's getting punted out there, is because the mainstream audience don't like reading subtitles or generally, things that aren't Americanized. Whatever the reason, I agree with him that's it's a better option to simply get the DVD of the original. It's a good movie that didn't require a remake beyond (again presumably) getting more money in the pot. I don't think Let Me In is a bad movie, just inferior and rather pointless. A burger in a bag version for the fast food audience.

I highly doubt he knows more about film than Ridley Scott. We could give Kermode 50 years and unlimited resources and he isn't going to ever produce an Alien or Blade Runner.

Jim Lee's ability's means he can probably draw better and produce better material than the majority of art critics. His acquired knowledge and ability doesn't make him any more knowledgeable on the "what is" or "what was" critique of art. For example, Jim Lee, doesn't have a proper knowledge of anatomy, he learned from George Bridgman, which is primarily about form. Many art critics (as well as artists of lesser ability) do have a knowledge of anatomy beyond him, as well as more of a knowledge on the history of art as well as the techniques used, without the ability to put it down on paper correctly. Kermode, like the majority of critics, probably does have less ability on making films. Which isn't the entirety of Cinema.

Mark Kermode has this huge hard-on of hatred for John Boorman simply because John Boorman made The Exorcist II, which he felt, trashed The Exorcist

As do the majority of critics. People were laughing in the cinema. In comparison, The Exorcist had barf bags. It should be noted, Mark Kermode did like the Exorcists III, which is a very different movie from the Exorcist.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Alan Moore has had pretty big achievements, yet, he practically hates every movie adapted from his material, many of which, he refuses to watch or have anything to do with, including the Watchman, he specifically didn't want his name associated with it and commented that he cursed Zack Snyder. He is by far lauded, better respected, and far more known than Kermode by comparison. As well as that, he is quite clearly deliberately small minded in comparison to Kermode when it comes to views on his own adapted creations.

Man...Alan Moore scares me! If I met him in a dark alley...I swear I would scream like a girl. Have you heard him "do Rorschach"? (Ok...now I'm in the mood to throw Watchmen into the player...)

Oh, I wasn't saying that, I can understand if it was put across wrongly as a statement, I agree with him 100% on that it's only really good when it is emulating (Swedish) Let the Right One in lacking the subtlety which made the original great. The CGI comment also seemed to ring true. I don't get the point of seeing it either, it's out on DVD. Presumably, the reason it's getting punted out there, is because the mainstream audience don't like reading subtitles or generally, things that aren't Americanized. Whatever the reason, I agree with him that's it's a better option to simply get the DVD of the original. It's a good movie that didn't require a remake beyond (again presumably) getting more money in the pot. I don't think Let Me In is a bad movie, just inferior and rather pointless. A burger in a bag version for the fast food audience.

I suppose it may look that way to him. I see it as another version of the GREAT story written by Lindgvist. I like all three versions personally and feel incredibly blessed that all of them are really good. Each has its own feel and the characters are different in each one. You can choose between Eli the ancient manipulator (novel), Eli the lonely boy vampire (LTROI), or Abby the sad little vampire who has forgotten she is a girl (LMI).

Saw LTROI first and liked it a lot. But when I saw LMI that triggered whatever fanboy switch some of us around here have and I tripped over into "obsessed" territory. LMI is now my favorite movie of the year and one of my favorites of all time. (I just wrote a fanfic chapter about Owen and Abby!) I think Chloë Moretz is going to be the next Meryl Streep and Kodi Smit-McPhee could be the next Daniel Day Lewis. Richard Jenkins' credentials are well known of course...he's so good in LMI you actually feel sympathy for the "caretaker" character for the very first time in the history of this story.

I think Reeves turned it into more of a tragic love story than the others were. (Well...the child vampire was a boy in the others) The kids' acting ability really sucked me in. My favorite scenes are the "boring" ones where the kids are just talking. I think Abby is one of the saddest, most heartbreaking characters I've ever seen on screen. When she reaches for that copy of Romeo and Juliet in Owen's bag and gazes at it longingly, my heart breaks for her. 300 years of her history is written on Chloë Moretz's face there. And seeing her hopeful smile fade away when she knocks on Owen's door....augh!

I know that LTROI is Kermod's favorite movie of '08. That's colored his perception. He feels he must defend it against what he perceives as an attack. If he thinks the car crash or the photo was in LTROI he needs to re watch it. There is no cop character in LTROI. Thomas is far far different from Hakan. Abby is a different gender from Eli! All the "best parts" come from the novel...Kermod has forgotten that too.

I've heard the "subtlety" argument too and that doesn't make sense. (1) More "subtle" doesn't equal "better movie". "Subtle" is a descriptive term that some are erroneously using as a measuring stick for "good movie". (2) LTROI feels the need to explain some things that LMI doesn't also. It can work both ways if that is automatically "bad".

 

[Brother Jack]

Kermode is a bit of a plonker. I saw him interview Spielberg for that long special and all he did was suck up as much as he possibly could. And hearing that he hated Watchmen completely invalidates his opinion for me LOL

So because you disagree with him his opinion is invalid?

 

[ALP]

So because you disagree with him his opinion is invalid?

No, that is only the climax of a full cataclysm. And you missed a very important part of my post that specifically stated "for me,"

 

[CrimsonMist]

As do the majority of critics. People were laughing in the cinema. In comparison, The Exorcist had barf bags.

But that's just it. It DIDN'T trash the original! Do you watch The Exorcist and go "Man, **** JOHN BOORMAN!!" or do you watch the film and go "....holy ****!". The second Exorcist film didn't do anything to the original. It didn't trash it, or lessen its impact or it's effect. You don't like the sequel? Don't watch it and pretend it never existed. For me, the existence of a 2nd film doesn't ruin at all, in any way, the effect of the original film.

Do you watch Burton's first Batman film just to moan over Batman & Robin? I doubt it. Batman & Robin has NO EFFECT whatsoever on the impact and effect of BATMAN. At all.

Kermode is still full of ****.

 

[Valaquen]

A lot of people complain about ALIEN 3 ****ting on ALIENS. But y'know ...

 

[kedrell]

I always find Kermode entertaining. I agree off and on with him but here I must disagree. Not necessarily with his assertion that LTROI is a film about childhood that happens to have vampires in it and LMI being a vampire film that features children as the main characters. I agree with him on that. Where I disagree is in thinking the latter is somehow a bad idea. I loved it.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

One of the things I didn't like was Chloe Morets. Not her acting but her physical appearance and screen presence. Lina Leanderasson sort of had a weird beautiful etheral quality about her like the snowy still background is an extension of her character. When I see Chloe Morets outside of Kick-ass she makes me think of a duck.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

One of the things I didn't like was Chloe Morets. Not her acting but her physical appearance and screen presence. Lina Leanderasson sort of had a weird beautiful etheral quality about her like the snowy still background is an extension of her character. When I see Chloe Morets outside of Kick-ass she makes me think of a duck.

That's fair. Lina was far more "ethereal".

I've actually seen discussions about Chloë Moretz (proper spelling, just for future reference) and whether or not she will be "hot". She's kinda awkward looking in a way. But she's got such a sweet face...breaks my heart when she is sad in LMI.

I compare Moretz more to Jodi Foster than Natalie Portman in the "child actor" category. Though Natalie grew up to be quite hot, I think her acting is suspect. Never had a doubt about Foster's acting though. Chloë could be the next Meryl Streep and I would not be surprised in the least. (Streep being another one that is never mentioned as "hot" but is one of the greatest to ever live) I will also not be surprised if Lina's career never goes anywhere.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Stephen King names Let Me In as his #1 for 2010 in Entertainment Weekly (EW hasn't posted it to their site yet):

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayl..._king_names_let_me_in_the_best_movie_of_2010#

Geeks love to champion films but it seems that this year, they either stayed away or couldn’t convince anyone other than their Internet friends to go to the movies. “Kick-Ass” and “Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World” failed to set the box office on fire, but perhaps most deserving of mainstream appreciation and fanboy admiration, Matt Reeves’ “Let Me In” was unfairly and unfortunately overlooked when it hit theaters last month. As much as his taste can be dubious—in past years the author has listed the likes of “Death Race,” “Lakeview Terrace,” “The Ruins” and “The Last House on the Left” as his favorites—Stephen King gets applause from us this year for topping his best of 2010 movies list with “Let Me In,” a move we hope will get the film the exposure it needs. The remake of Tomas Alfredson‘s cult hit “Let The Right One In,” is arguably even better, delivering a more realized world, strong performances from both Kodi Smit-McPhee and Chloe Moretz and solid special effects. Reeves nailed the tone and tenor the film required, while delivering a film that is more emotionally satisfying and rich than its predecessor. Oh yeah, and the score by Michael Giacchino is ace. In fact, don’t be surprised to find it on our list of the best flicks of year when we get ours out later next month.
Anyway, check out the rest of King’s list after the jump. It’s not entirely terrible, just don’t expect anything resembling arthouse fare. And this might be the only place you’ll find the ridiculous “Takers” on any year end lists. [EW print edition via /Film]
10. Green Zone – “one Iraq war movie that puts story and suspense above shrill outrage.”
9. Jackass 3D
8. Monsters
7. Splice
6. Kick-Ass
5. Takers – “This satisfyingly complex cops-’n’-robbers movie features great performances … and the armored-car heist is the best action sequence I’ve seen this year.”
4. The Social Network – “succeeds where Michael Douglas; Wall Street sequel fails.”
3. Inception
2. The Town – “Bad title, fantastic movie. … a strangely intimare film”
1. Let Me In

 

[Kurosawa]

Mark Kermode has this huge hard-on of hatred for John Boorman simply because John Boorman made The Exorcist II, which he felt, trashed The Exorcist, his favorite film ever, in some horrific, traumatizing way. He thinks it is the worst film ever made, ever(which is complete b.s. It's not good, but it isn't awful. Hell, Scorsese likes it.) and he has this lunatic theory that Boorman made both The Exorcist II and Zardoz because Boorman had it in my mind that he was some sort of brilliant autuer who thought he was above horror and sci-fi.

If any film critic ever needed a firm kick to the face, it's Mark Kermode.

The Exorcist is one of the most overrated movies in the history of cinema. Overrated is an overused term but in the case of The Exorcist, it is the correct term.

Boorman has made good and bad movies, but Excalibur is one of the greatest films ever made.