Oct. 1, 2010, 1 a.m. CST
by STICKY WHITE
Oct. 1, 2010, 1:13 a.m. CST
....You'd think they'd be tired of lamenting the loss of their online boyfriend by now...
Oct. 1, 2010, 1:20 a.m. CST
by D o o d
the damn film is a copy of another film. I'm not saying it shouldn't have been made, I'm just saying that to be a classic it needs to be around for a very long time and to be a masterpiece it will need to inspire many other movies like it etc. Well this one was inspired by a masterpiece!
Oct. 1, 2010, 1:21 a.m. CST
by STICKY WHITE
...You'd think they'd be tired of lamenting the lamenters by now...
Oct. 1, 2010, 1:52 a.m. CST
Oct. 1, 2010, 2:48 a.m. CST
Nice to see such an eleoquent and well thought out review on here. I have no problem with remakes, I look at them like I look at comics, just ome artists take on a tale or characters. Looking forward to seeing this one. Loved the original, which I saw thanks to this site's praising of it.
Oct. 1, 2010, 2:58 a.m. CST
Where everything is great!!!!! Let The Right one Is one of Top vampire films of all time! It's so not, people. It's overrated and loved because it's artsy. But it never really come together.
Oct. 1, 2010, 3:20 a.m. CST
If you're going to knock a movie, first of all learn to use the English language. Honest to God, anyone on this talkback board who can't use English grammar has nothing to say to me, ever. My four year old niece knows enough about subject-verb agreement to write 'never really *came* together'. not 'never really come together.' And don't use 'so' as an intensifier. 'It's certainly not' is fine. 'It's so not' makes you sound like an illiterate preteen. Thirdly, if you're knocking a film, give criteria. You know, actual *evidence* to support your claims. 'It's so not' is, pardon my saying so, 'so not' evidence ;) Better yet, stay the fuck off these talkbacks until you learn to speak the language of the country you live in, you overprivileged moron.
Oct. 1, 2010, 5:14 a.m. CST
Comparing Batman Begins to Batman (89). The two films couldn't be more different. I thought this site was run by film fans? And no, I'm still not watching this pointless remake.
Oct. 1, 2010, 6:48 a.m. CST
in part because I did love the original and found it haunting and beautiful. I am also interested since this is Hammer's first attempt at horror films in a long time. I hope they do well as I want to see more.
Oct. 1, 2010, 6:58 a.m. CST
absolutely sucked, compared to the original.<BR><BR>Just wanted to get that in.<BR><BR>As for this, I am not sure if I'll be seeing it or not. Probably rent it one day. Loved the original, but am very iffy on this one.
Oct. 1, 2010, 6:59 a.m. CST
I'm sure it will be a very well made movie. But like the Sin City movie, I fear this remake will be too close to the original. I'm both excited to see it and sort of not excited at the same time.
Oct. 1, 2010, 7:19 a.m. CST
He is not writing this for the AICN audience. Saying Chloe Moretz was Hit-Girl? Really? How many people who drill this deep into the site don't already know that? <p> I'm conflicted about seeing this movie. If it's a pale imitation of the original, that would make it a good movie. On the other hand, I don't want to reward a blatant cash-grabbing copycat. Most likely this is a rental.
Oct. 1, 2010, 9:34 a.m. CST
I'm gonna see it this weekend. Just love Chloe Moretz. Not in a weird way tho. Then again, maybe I do. I need coffee.
Oct. 1, 2010, 9:40 a.m. CST
I'll see LET ME IN based on OTHER critics and fans. Simply can NEVER trust Capone again after his assigned roll-over for the MACGRUBER travesty.
Oct. 1, 2010, 9:55 a.m. CST
I think it is a good thing that the film was remade. It is a simple fact that casual movie fans (as opposed to the more passionate type that visits AICN) tend to avoid foreign language films. (Yes,there are exceptions.) So by remaking this film in English, the potential audience is expanded greatly. And from this group, many more people will end up seeking out the original version and the book as well. Everybody wins.
Oct. 1, 2010, 10:06 a.m. CST
It's an OK movie that, despite what the review says, does go shot-for-shot a few times. The streamlining of the story, such as the inclusion of the cop, makes it all a lot less interesting. All the victims live a lot closer together as everyone has to know everyone in Hollywood films these days. The music cues are far from subtle, again subtracting from what made the original so special. It was good to see the Hammer name back on the screen though (for whatever reasons) and their new logo, which is a bit of a copy of Marvel's) has some nice images of past glories.
Oct. 1, 2010, 11:40 a.m. CST
that those remakes/reboots were years later. This was like...12 minutes later.
Oct. 1, 2010, 12:29 p.m. CST
Can't DVader just create a new account with sombre other name? Maybe DBader or DVaderReturns or some shit? What's the point really?
Oct. 1, 2010, 12:39 p.m. CST
won't be able to handle it so I haven't shown it to her. Sure, she is fine with rape scenes a-la "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" but scary movies with any kind of gore completely repulse her. Is this one tamer or heavier than the original?
Oct. 1, 2010, 12:54 p.m. CST
But if it's ANY kind of gore, then forget it, I guess...
Oct. 1, 2010, 12:59 p.m. CST
And I had to tell her exactly when to cover her eyes. I think she just doesn't like scary movies. Right after the closing scene of Paranormal Activity (which I screamed like a girl at) she cried for like 10 minutes and then we had to pray.
Oct. 1, 2010, 1:16 p.m. CST
Why is no one on this sight mentioning the horrible CGI? I saw this last night at the landmark theater in los angeles and i was really disappointed by that. (Spoiler alert) The scene where Abby sets a trap for the guy in the tunnel was shameful. All of a sudden Abby and her victim turn into obvious cartoons complete with herky-jerky, weightless movements. The original used CG with more subtlety, enhancing things but not trying to completely make scenes and people out of CG'd imagery. Then later Abby climbs a tree and it was worse than the cat Scene in the original. What's wrong with using a harness or something to make her jump, maybe? It was really jarring. One other problem i had with this version was the removal of the bar patrons. there was just enough time spent getting to know them so that when they became victims, it seemed to matter more. when Virginia dies in the original, you feel for her because she comes to terms with what's happened and without saying anything to anyone, she allows herself to die rather than live like that. Her counterpart in the new version doesn't seem to matter much. She's just an empty character. Even the Jocke character from the first movie has sympathy from the audience because of the way his friends grieve. Then the search for Abby became personal. The one thing i thought was better was the way Abby's companion was caught. Pretty good Scene. Anyway, that's my 2 cents worth.
Oct. 1, 2010, 1:25 p.m. CST
by Raging Dogs Productions
"the damn film is a copy of another film." Which was itself a copy of a novel.
Oct. 1, 2010, 2:35 p.m. CST
by Adelai Niska
So many people I know haven't bothered to see the original, but I bet I can get them out to see this.
Oct. 1, 2010, 3:04 p.m. CST
Besides the obvious, why did D.Vader get banned? I missed it.
Oct. 1, 2010, 5:14 p.m. CST
If we have to have Americanized versions of foreign films this should certainly be a go to example of how to do it.
Oct. 2, 2010, 12:31 a.m. CST
"Let Me In" is definitely heavier on the gore and violence.