22: Let Me In (2010)


(I tend to be unconcerned about SPOILERS in these things, but since this film does have some element of a twist, SPOILER ALERT)

I admit that when I heard a remake of the 2008 Swedish film Let the Right One In was in the works, my first thought was, “Does this really have to be made?” That film, about the relationship between a troubled young boy and a girl who’s not really a girl but a vampire, is expertly made, layered with violence and love and tragedy, and contains a complicated emotional relationship at its core.

But all of those things also apply to Let Me In, the American remake adapted and directed by Matt Reeves. When we talk about cinematic adaptations or remakes, the discussion is often framed in what’s called “fidelity discourse”. We judge an adaptation by whether it’s “faithful” or “betrays” the original text, as if that original incarnation of the story is a pure, unblemished source that cannot be tampered with. And a remake must shoulder the burden of being “unoriginal”, as though the beats of the story are the only real work, and there is nothing to be said for any other element of cinematic craft. Let Me In, as a remake of a film that was adapted from a novel, faces a double burden.

This kind of scrutiny seems uniquely cinematic; cover songs as a concept are not as generally discredited as remakes are, and the variety of stage productions that emanate from a single dramatic text are viewed as a given. Yes, Let Me In has many plot points that map exactly to the Swedish film, as they tell the same basic story. And there are stylistic elements that have been borrowed from the earlier film, just as a cover song takes elements of the original — it’s in the new choices, in how the film unfolds as a collection of a multitude of different elements, that you find the artistic whole.

Some of the elisions that Reeves makes — removing the beat in the Swedish film that the vampire is really not even a girl vampire but a castrated boy vampire — could be seen as a sign of timidity and normalizing the narrative for mainstream America. But with the way Reeves tells this story, he makes a strong case for streamlining and tuning the relationship between Owen (Kodi Smit-McPhee)  and Abby (Chloë Moretz). Instead of the visceral shock of that gender reversal, Reeves replaces it with a beat in which Owen truly understands the ultimate fate of those that get close to Abby. It’s only one of the ways in which Reeves tells a story that’s inflected differently than its Swedish counterpart.

Matt Zoller Seitz’s close analysis of the kidnapping scene shows Reeves’s mastery of composition and pacing, which was evident in Cloverfield but somewhat hidden behind that film’s first-person visual conceit. Here, working from a more restrained baseline, the control Reeves has over the visual field is much clearer, and just one of the reasons why this film should be viewed as a companion to Let the Right One In, not a parasite.

Comments
One Response to “22: Let Me In (2010)”
  1. Caitlin says:

    Well, the question of fidelity in music has a bit of a different history. Recorded music is not regarded as a distinct artform the way theatre and film are (though, these days we are moving further and further into the grey territory of media that has been integrated into live performance) . The question of fidelity has manifested itself in the development of sound recording technology (but sound “fidelity” is based on clarity of sound rather than how authentically it imitates hearing the performance live). In terms of text fidelity music is much closer to theater, and I would guess that this is a remnant of their shared history of live performance. Now, in opera, the question of the fidelity of a production to the text/score is a big issue. There are many musicologists who would attribute this to the long history of audio and video recorded opera (but at the end of the day it’s just a complex cocktail of conditions).

    I tend to think that the question of fidelity is a cultural principle rather than just cinematic, literary, etc. In Indian cinema, films are made and remade quite frequently. There are more than 10 cinematic adaptations of the Bengali novel Devdas and all of kinds of Bollywood adaptations of Western films. Ancient Sanskrit texts (including the great epics) were frequently amended by other authors. The classic Bollywood film Mughal-e-Azam is an adaptation of a popular historical tale that has been manipulated to actually give the story a pseudo-happy ending. There are hundreds of examples (and Salman Rushdie has some great things to say about fidelity and adaptation), but it boils down to a completely different way of approaching authenticity and narrative.

    Anyway. Enjoying the reviews!

Leave A Comment