Horror Movie Podcast Review of LTROI

[a_contemplative_life]

Well, it appears that my post was not approved. So much for being open to criticism!

Onward and upward . . .

[Jameron]

I downloaded the podcast and listened to it today as I was driving around at work.

They talk a lot and don't say much, sheesh.

I laughed out loud at the one guy saying that he felt "violated" when the one and a half second shot of Eli's crotch appeared on screen. Is this guy an adult? Does he not know about "movie magic"?

@acl ... an excellent response. Much better than "You guys are so wrong", which was floating through my head the whole time I was listening to them

.

[gkmoberg1]

Well, it appears that my post was not approved. So much for being open to criticism!

Onward and upward . . .

Yet it remains here for them to consider and, more openly, for anyone to discover & read. I'm glad you posted it. What you wrote carefully lays out a viewpoint and supports its view through each of your steps. Bravo! And who knows, perhaps they'll come here to give us a critique on your critique - that would be very welcome. Going over their viewpoint with them could be very revealing to all.

[gattoparde59]

I skipped the podcast altogether because of the plot spoilers ( ), but I did read through the comments. a_c_l's was much longer than the longest comment there, and I think they looked at the length of it and dismissed it as the work of some crazy guy and not what it was: a carefully reasoned argument.

I am afraid that "Eli the manipulator" is the majority opinion on this subject and anyone saying different is met with genuine surprise.

Off topic: "Art House" is a particular kind of movie theater and it so happens this is the only type of movie theater that will show something like Let the Right One In,, at least in the USA. Things seem to be different in the UK, at least for our movie.

[dongregg]

I laughed out loud at the one guy saying that he felt "violated" when the one and a half second shot of Eli's crotch appeared on screen. Is this guy an adult? Does he not know about "movie magic"?

.

Maybe they meant violated in a bodice ripping, swoony sort of way. Otherwise, how could they survive in the movie biz? I mean, Under the Skin must have either ravished their tender sensibilities or put them in straitjackets, whichever way they mean by "violated."

[a_contemplative_life]

I rechecked on my computer and my post is still "in moderation." For some reason, I was not able to see it on my cell phone this morning, so I wrongly assumed it had failed "moderation." SO, we'll just have to see.

[ElisLove]

Well, I posted my little reply. We'll see what they say...

Whether I click on it or drop in the URL, I still don't see your post. I plowed through all of them (boring! boring!) but nothing looked like it was from you. Is there maybe a delay before new stuff gets posted? Anyway, you can always copy and paste it here. You always have great posts, so...

Here's what I said.

I completely disagree with the “grooming” notion that dominated your discussion of Let the Right One In.

First, it is never established that Hakan’s relationship with Eli began when he was a boy or a young man. There are very few, if any, indications of affection between them, and Hakan’s unnatural reaction to a touch on the cheek bespeaks something strange in his character, which the novel explores in much greater detail. For obvious reasons, it was not included in the film.

Second, I think that if you review the film with a neutral eye, the grooming theory doesn’t really hold water.

When Eli meets Oskar, the first words out of her mouth are, “we can’t be friends.” Sincere? Or the first groundwork for a trap? At this point, Hakan hasn’t screwed up yet. What’s the motive for duplicity?

At the second meeting with Oskar, Eli is very hungry. She takes an interest in the Rubik’s Cube. He offers it to her. She initially refuses. Another act of duplicity? Did she know in advance that Oskar would ask again, offering it to her for just a day or so?

At the third encounter, Eli has solved the cube and taken a bath. Oskar offers her the Cube again when he finds out she doesn’t have a birthday. She refuses, stating, “It’s yours.” But when he asks her to show him how to solve it, she starts to show him. Another act of duplicity? Or just a lonely person who has a talent that someone else has demonstrated an interest in? It seems to me we are seeing friendship, not manipulation.

At the fourth encounter about the Morse code, Eli tells him to fight back against the bullies. Is this not good advice? And she doesn’t just say it, and then walk away … she offers to help if he needs it. Again, I say this is friendship, and it’s deepening. Oskar wants to communicate with her, and she wants to communicate with him.

Fifth encounter: the kiosk and the candy. Now if you are going to say that she tried the candy just to manipulate Oskar into feeling sorry for her, you are making her out to be pretty devious. Isn’t it equally plausible that she just doesn’t want to disappoint him, and hurt his feelings by refusing his offer of something to share? Now look at the expression on her face when Oskar hugs her. Tell me that’s evil. He can’t see her face, so why not a malicious smile? She’s hit a home run, right? Instead, she’s as stiff as a board, and confused. She can’t understand what it means to get a real hug. That’s how bad things are for her.

Sixth encounter–the bedroom scene. Where is the manipulation? If Eli were trying to recruit Oskar, why would she hesitate when he asks her to go steady? Wouldn’t she just readily agree? Why did she hesitate? I believe she’s worried about what Oskar means by “going steady.” Could he be looking for sex, just like Hakan? Eli is looking for love, not sex . . . as is Oskar. Eli is not sure that all Oskar really wants is a committed relationship. Once Oskar clarifies that “going steady” just means that you don’t do anything “special” and that things are just the same, she agrees. Again, you really have to paint her as totally evil to be construing this as one more point in a grand scheme of manipulation. Again, I think we are being shown a very lonely person who hates what she is, and has found someone who seems to accept her without a lot of questions. Eli wants to be physically close to this person. Eli is falling in love with Oskar. Doesn’t the music convey this? The hand-holding? But she knows she will have to leave soon; hence the note.

So Oskar unexpectedly slices his hand open and now Eli is forced to reveal herself to him. She probably figured after that episode that she’d never see him again. But when Oskar comes back to her apartment, what’s she do? Shuts him out; puts a door between them. Why? She’s scared. Let the right one in.

“Are you a vampire?” The big question. The biggest question.

“I live off blood–yes.” Now he knows. But Oskar still doesn’t run away, just keeps asking questions. “Are you dead?” “No–can’t you tell?” Didn’t that exchange make you smile?

“Are you old?”

“I’m 12–but I’ve been 12 for a long time.” So, what we’re dealing with is someone who’s perpetually twelve. Eli is NOT a grown-up person in a child’s body. Eli is a frozen child.

I just do not see manipulation of Oskar in this part at all. Oskar clearly has the upper hand; he has the moral authority. She tries to offer him money so he’ll stay, but he accuses her of stealing it. Check out the imperious look he gives her right before she lets him leave. She’s not fooling anyone.

Ninth encounter–Eli comes to Oskar’s apartment. She obviously wants to make amends. But instead, Oskar acts like a jerk and refuses to give her a clear invitation to come in. So she walks in anyway and begins to bleed. Unless he clarifies the invitation, she presumably will bleed to death. She’s literally put her life in his hands. Did she plan this? Did she know in advance that Oskar would act this way? Was it one more stepping stone in making Oskar her slave? Or was it Eli showing Oskar how much she trusts him?

“Be me a little.” The scene is hard to interpret because we don’t know exactly what passed between them after Eli said this. (In the novel, Eli reveals his memory of being neutered and bitten by the vampire nobleman.) I think what motivated Eli to do this was a desire for understanding. Oskar is finally keyed into what Eli is (he said “who are you?” at the beginning of the conversation), and his attitude initially is, “you kill people–ugh.” Eli tells Oskar that she doesn’t kill people because she wants to, but because she has to, in order to live. This is entirely consistent with the remorse displayed after she kills Jocke at the beginning of the film.

When Eli tells Oskar “you want to live, just like me” she is pointing out to Oskar that he suffers from the same curse. Oskar is filled with hate and violence because the bullies have not allowed Oskar “to live.” They are killing his soul, just like Eli’s being a vampire is killing her soul. Oskar is becoming a monster, just like Eli and his desire to kill is much less morally justifiable than Eli’s.

The manipulation theory really breaks down after Lacke is killed. Oskar demonstrates clearly that he is not really a killer; all Lacke has to do is turn and look at him, and Oskar backs down. Then after Eli does her business, he drops his knife. When real violence rears its ugly head, he wants no part of it. Now if you are Eli and you are hoping to recruit Oskar, wouldn’t this be the perfect time to ask him if he’d go with you? He’s a witness to a murder; he’s scared. There’s the opening. Instead, Eli tells him that she has to go away. And she does; we see the taxi and her empty apartment.

The pool scene. According to the “grooming” theory, saving your best friend’s life now becomes the crowning act of manipulation. Okay, well I’ll tell you what: the next time you see someone drowning me in a pool, feel free to be manipulative. I’d rather live and be manipulated, then die because I have a friend who doesn’t follow through on her promise. And don’t tell me that the look they exchange at the end isn’t anything but the purest expression of love ever committed to film. No way is there bad faith in that.

John Ajvide Lindqvist said this his script was “about being lifted out of the darkness by love. About going under and suddenly being rescued by a helping hand.” “Above all it’s a love story. Of how Eli’s love releases Oskar, how she makes him look upon himself in a different light. Not as the scared one, not as the victim.”

Tomas Alfredson, the director, said “The story of love. . . . I cut the novel to only one track: the love story. What makes it unusual is that it is a love story with no sex, with a castrated boy. This is pure love. It’s very rare, but I have seen it. Also, when a child, I had dreams about such a love, what it looks like it. It is pre-sexual love, total love, a devoted love.”

You guys missed the mark by a mile.

maybe Eli has read How to win friends and influence people - Dale Carnegie