I loved the original (called Let The Right One In). For me, it's the only vampire movie worth discussing. From early reports, this Matt Reeves-directed remake is NOT a shot-for-shot re-creation. That makes me happy; one can adapt another film and make it their own but still pay tribute to the original's strengths. This is one horror movie that I'll be seeing on the big screen.
3 comments:
Just recently saw "Let the Right One In" and I wonder why.... Why is there the need to redo a perfectly good film?! The copy I saw was dubbed, so you didn't even have to read subtitles.... SO WHY? Let credit and recognition go to the originators !!! Does everything have to be redone with everything American?
I loved the original. Loved it. Blew me away. Not a fan, overall, of the vampire genre. Not a Twi-Hard. No True Blood for me. Underworld can suck it. But Let the Right One In was a masterpiece.
I agree with you in theory, Giggles. This isn't a necessary movie. However, if one MUST re-make a film that was flawless to begin with, it helps to start with great casting (which they've done) and it also helps to expand upon the original material (which they've apparently done based on the reviews I have been reading).
Keep in mind...the original is based on a book...so that film is itself a copy of a previously created piece of art.
Also, while Cloverfield is a massively different film than something like Let Me In, I think that Matt Reeves is a talent to look out for over the next few years...I think he's gonna surprise people with Let Me In.
Gotcha.... Not a fan of the genre either, but knew I had to see it.... Just may see the re-do to compare.... Thx for your answering comments!!
Post a Comment