You know the feeling...

[Lacenaire]

First of all, this film/story IS a "fairy tale" - if I get it right what you mean by this, in this case, degrading phrase - however dark and grim it is. It isn't like Pan's Labyrinth, in which the supernatural elements we see constitute a haven where Ophelia can escape from the otherwise unbearable cruelty of reality. Those all are just products of the protagonist's imagination. Whereas in LTROI everything is "real". The parallelism between some aspects of the movie and human nature doesn't make it less of a "fairy tale". This is a factor that every worthwhile story has in order to bear some depth and lesson. Above all, fairy tales do. (They are edifying, that's why they are written for children, who are in need of such instructions due to their lack of life experience.) Being what you call a "fairy tale" doesn't exclude the possibility of being a work of art. On that basis, a lot of movie and book - widely considered as art - should be deprived of that label.

The intention of LTROI is - besides JAL's revenge on his bullies - to captivate the viewer/reader with the love of Eli and Oskar. All the horror and gloom is the balance that prevents the movie/book from being too one-sided and sentimental, while it emphasizes the beauty and innocence of the two mains' unconditional love for eachother. If you care about Eli's "harmful effects" on society instead of caring about her and Oskar's happiness, LTROI hasn't succeeded in your case.

And yup, I'm sure that JAL'd rather regard an epilogue in which Oskar and Eli fulfill their love as happy then one in which things work out for the benefit of humanity.
C'mon, it's just fiction. Who gives a shit about mankind? (Not that I'd anyway... )

Since there is obviously not the slightest chance of any mutual understanding there is no point continuing this discussion. Almost nothing that you say has any relevance to what I have been saying. "Harmful effects" on society do not concern me. I never wrote anything derogatory about fairy tales - many of them are works of art.

What I am objecting is your using words like "love" and "happy" and other things when you do not mean that at all. Your last sentences are perfect example of that kind of thing. They make any discussion between us quite pointless. (Presumably next time you will tell us you don't give a shit about yourself... I would like to see that put to a test).

But as we are on this, I have a question. Why didn't Alfredson make Eli and Oskar ugly like Lacke and his crowd, and their victims beautiful, cute and loveable? What if Lina was playing one of Eli's victims and the actors who play Lacke and Virginia played Oskar and Eli? Their love could be so pure...

By the way, there is a much better and much more famous novel with some similar themes: love, 12 year old girl, and even a human monster. The monster really loves the girl and many careless readers even sympathise with the monster or think that the author does. But actually they are quite wrong and only think so because they are careless and miss or misunderstand some key evidence and thus are themselves manipulated by the monster. Its a much more subtle book, of course.

I might write more about this again, but perhaps I won't. I doubt if would do anything for any mutual understanding so let's just agree we are just made of completely different stuff and end it here.

[PeteMork]

The intention of LTROI is - besides JAL's revenge on his bullies - to captivate the viewer/reader with the love of Eli and Oskar. All the horror and gloom is the balance that prevents the movie/book from being too one-sided and sentimental, while it emphasizes the beauty and innocence of the two mains' unconditional love for eachother. If you care about Eli's "harmful effects" on society instead of caring about her and Oskar's happiness, LTROI hasn't succeeded in your case.

I disagree with the last line, as I view myself as a counterexample. I was moved by the love story and am certainly not immune to the infection, but I do care about the harmful effects.

I agree with lombano. Even with our strong reactions to Eli's and Oskar's beautiful love story, the harmful effects cannot be overstated, which will make any epilogue with JAL's "happy ending," where Eli is free to continue her eating habits, quite difficult to pull off. But, on the other hand, I think any ending that requires Eli to die would have to be handled very carefully, if we can take JAL at his word about the unambiguous happy ending he is working on. All I can say is that I'm glad its his problem and not mine.

[Mr.Sample]

Almost nothing that you say has any relevance to what I have been saying

I'm pretty sure of the contrary.

But as we are on this, I have a question. Why didn't Alfredson make Eli and Oskar ugly like Lacke and his crowd, and their victims beautiful, cute and loveable? What if Lina was playing one of Eli's victims and the actors who play Lacke and Virginia played Oskar and Eli? Their love could be so pure...

Isn't it obvious? Name a romance movie with two depraved middle-aged alcoholists as the main characters. They aren't too decorative to watch them for 2hours. Besides, the bulk of the movie-goers could hardly identify with such blokes. Of course, the fact that Eli and Oskar are children is a reason of my sympathy towards them, so what? To tell the truth, I don't really see what you are alluding to...

By the way, there is a much better and much more famous novel with some similar themes: love, 12 year old girl, and even a human monster. The monster really loves the girl and many careless readers even sympathise with the monster or think that the author does. But actually they are quite wrong and only think so because they are careless and miss or misunderstand some key evidence and thus are themselves manipulated by the monster. Its a much more subtle book, of course.

No offense, but have you read the novel(LTROI) properly yet?
Yeah, there are key evidences in LTROI too, but what they imply is surely not any kind of manipulation on the part of the "monster".

[Mr.Sample]

The intention of LTROI is - besides JAL's revenge on his bullies - to captivate the viewer/reader with the love of Eli and Oskar. All the horror and gloom is the balance that prevents the movie/book from being too one-sided and sentimental, while it emphasizes the beauty and innocence of the two mains' unconditional love for eachother. If you care about Eli's "harmful effects" on society instead of caring about her and Oskar's happiness, LTROI hasn't succeeded in your case.

I disagree with the last line, as I view myself as a counterexample. I was moved by the love story and am certainly not immune to the infection, but I do care about the harmful effects.

I agree with lombano. Even with our strong reactions to Eli's and Oskar's beautiful love story, the harmful effects cannot be overstated, which will make any epilogue with JAL's "happy ending," where Eli is free to continue her eating habits, quite difficult to pull off. But, on the other hand, I think any ending that requires Eli to die would have to be handled very carefully, if we can take JAL at his word about the unambiguous happy ending he is working on. All I can say is that I'm glad its his problem and not mine.

Well, that's just my slight misanthropy then.

[lombano]

Even with our strong reactions to Eli's and Oskar's beautiful love story, the harmful effects cannot be overstated, which will make any epilogue with JAL's "happy ending," where Eli is free to continue her eating habits, quite difficult to pull off. But, on the other hand, I think any ending that requires Eli to die would have to be handled very carefully, if we can take JAL at his word about the unambiguous happy ending he is working on.

Which is why I view the ending as bittersweet or ambiguous, I don't think it's tenable to say it's a happy ending as it leaves both the issue of Eli's drinking problem and of Oskar's aging unresolved (on the other hand, it's not a purely dark or tragic one, one can easily imagine much darker endings). The only purely happy epilogue I can think of is that Eli turns Oskar and they discover that they can eat blood sausages provided they're soaked in habanero sauce or some equally contrived solution.

But as we are on this, I have a question. Why didn't Alfredson make Eli and Oskar ugly like Lacke and his crowd, and their victims beautiful, cute and loveable? What if Lina was playing one of Eli's victims and the actors who play Lacke and Virginia played Oskar and Eli? Their love could be so pure...

There was a thread ages ago in which it was discussed if Kare was not too good-looking for the part, if a chubby boy (faithful to the novel) would not have been better. I prefer the novel's Oskar precisely because he's so unglamorous.

[PeteMork]

Even with our strong reactions to Eli's and Oskar's beautiful love story, the harmful effects cannot be overstated, which will make any epilogue with JAL's "happy ending," where Eli is free to continue her eating habits, quite difficult to pull off. But, on the other hand, I think any ending that requires Eli to die would have to be handled very carefully, if we can take JAL at his word about the unambiguous happy ending he is working on.

Which is why I view the ending as bittersweet or ambiguous, I don't think it's tenable to say it's a happy ending as it leaves both the issue of Eli's drinking problem and of Oskar's aging unresolved (on the other hand, it's not a purely dark or tragic one, one can easily imagine much darker endings). The only purely happy epilogue I can think of is that Eli turns Oskar and they discover that they can eat blood sausages provided they're soaked in habanero sauce or some equally contrived solution.

The ending is indeed bittersweet. However the final moment of the film, if we could freeze it in time, constitutes everything we could wish for in a happy ending (Just like in Keat's, "Ode on a Grecian Urn," where a moment in time, just before the guy catches the girl, is frozen forever on the side of a Grecian Urn.) I think many of us are desperately trying to extend this moment by trying to wrestle a lasting happiness for them out of an almost impossible situation. Which is why the Fan Fiction area is so "awesome" -- I mean "fun. fun." to visit.

[Lacenaire]

But as we are on this, I have a question. Why didn't Alfredson make Eli and Oskar ugly like Lacke and his crowd, and their victims beautiful, cute and loveable? What if Lina was playing one of Eli's victims and the actors who play Lacke and Virginia played Oskar and Eli? Their love could be so pure...

There was a thread ages ago in which it was discussed if Kare was not too good-looking for the part, if a chubby boy (faithful to the novel) would not have been better. I prefer the novel's Oskar precisely because he's so unglamorous.

I meant something a little different. I was trying to point out the falsity of these feelings of happiness etc, that people express just by trying to make them imagine the roles of victims played by characters more sympathetic than Oskar and Eli. It would not be hard to do that. But I was wrong because I was assuming that people care about how sympathetic the victims are. I think that some people simply view this kind of film or novel exactly as they do a computer game. In a computer game you can become, say, a vampire, you score points when you kill people and drink their blood and you can be perfectly happy doing this. It's only a game. The vicitms are not human. I don't mind that at all,actually, but I just don't think that's art. If some people insist on calling this sort of thing "art" - fine they can call it anything they like. But by my definition - if you ever have to say things like "its only a novel", or "it's only a film" or "it's only a game", then this in not art. The feelings one experiences in art are the same as those in real life - you never need to say "it's only ...".
But everyone is, of course, free to use words as they like. The only point is that if you do not use words in the same way you can't have a meaningful discussion.

No offense, but have you read the novel(LTROI) properly yet?
Yeah, there are key evidences in LTROI too, but what they imply is surely not any kind of manipulation on the part of the "monster".

I have it here. I also have a question. No offence, but have you actually ever read any (serious) novel by a recognised great writer?

But as we are on this, I have a question. Why didn't Alfredson make Eli and Oskar ugly like Lacke and his crowd, and their victims beautiful, cute and loveable? What if Lina was playing one of Eli's victims and the actors who play Lacke and Virginia played Oskar and Eli? Their love could be so pure...

Isn't it obvious? Name a romance movie with two depraved middle-aged alcoholists as the main characters. They aren't too decorative to watch them for 2hours. Besides, the bulk of the movie-goers could hardly identify with such blokes. Of course, the fact that Eli and Oskar are children is a reason of my sympathy towards them, so what? To tell the truth, I don't really see what you are alluding to...

I am alluding to the fact that none of the things you say above has any applicability to art. There are many great novels and films about "middle aged alcoholics" (e.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2urvufPJMU or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emo4ShoErx0) and whether the "bulk of movie goers" identifies with them has completely no importance. In fact, that's a basic fact about "art".

[Lacenaire]

Amazingly this thread has now had even more views than "Season's greetings from the author"

[sauvin]

Amazingly this thread has now had even more views than "Season's greetings from the author"

People DO so love a really good bonfire, and this one looks like a whole furniture store got busted up and chucked into it.

[Struan]

People DO so love a really good bonfire, and this one looks like a whole furniture store got busted up and chucked into it.

Haha! Well put sauvin.
Of course the comparison is unfair, that other thread has been burning on just the two logs JAL threw into it. If he chucked another one, we might see it skyrocket again...