Ah, yes.... the French horror cinema. Yet again another movie from across the pond. It stars Beatrice Dalle and Vincent Gallo in a story of erotica and canniblism. Sounded like an interesting mix and I am a fan of Vincent Gallo, so it seemed like a no brainer. Well, what I didn't count on was the fact that this was from the first half of the 2000's. At that time, the French still felt like a movie had to be pretentious to be good and by my count there hasn't been one good horror movie that was pretentious. I'm not saying that they don't exist, I'm just saying that they're like oil and water.... they don't mix. Now this movie isn't in French, not the whole thing anyway. It's a mix of French and American.... I suppose so Vincent Gallo wouldn't need to learn the language. The cover for the DVD, the stills from the movie and some certain scenes in it were just beautiful. Very well done images of a bloody woman doing different things. All things pointed to a good movie going experience. Well, things didn't work out that way. If this movie had been made last year and was like this, then I might have lost faith in the French horror cinema. Luckily it was from long enough ago that I can forgive the error in judgement.
The plot is simple. A man, who becomes cannibalistic when he's aroused heads to France with his girl. He's taken a job over there and is moving to start a life there. Meanwhile, a woman with the same afflection is basically a prisoner in her own home. The doors and windows are all sealed up and she is almost an animal. A couple of guys come by there very often and try to get in. She keeps enticing them to break in, but her intentions aren't pure. The man is doing everything he can to contain his urges, however it eventually overwhelms him. Soon he meets up with the woman in the house and things kind of get messy.This movie was not good. Maybe I missed the point, I hope that was the case. It was just so slow and there was hardly any dialouge and when people did speak, it didn't seem to move the plot along much. A lot of things are implied and a lot of that leads to confusion. The scenes mentioned earlier of blood and the woman are the only parts of this movie that were worthwhile. They're shot in a way that's very flattering even with the subject matter involved. I really wanted to like this movie. It had the recipe for something that could have been great. It's not because it was slow, I like movies that build to a climax no matter how slow. It's not because it was a bit pretentious, movies can be pretentious and still be good. It's not because of the actors, they're good actors.... it was just that they were in a bad movie.
This is something that I never need to see again. A 1 out of 5 star movie will, generally, always be a 1 out of 5 star movie. This just had nothing worth talking about. I wish I could pinpoint the reason it was so terrible. There are a lot of reviewers out there that thought this was a great movie. Maybe I'll never understand why that is and to be honest, I don't know that I care to understand. I don't want my money back, nor do I regret spending the time on it. This movie has been on my radar as something to see for a long time. I just finally felt it was the right time to watch it. Now I can move on with my life and it's one more free space in my Netflix queue. I'm not a fan of cannibals and this just adds another nail in their coffin.
Good French horror films: 'Haute Tension aka High Tension', 'À l'intérieur aka Inside' and 'La Horde aka The Horde'
the battle of the re-makes will never end.... as long as people continue to make films and then re-make them, there will be purists who say it's wrong and others who say it's okay.... and then there's the small group of people who will only know about the original or the re-make, but not both.... i used to be on the side of those who didn't think re-makes were okay.... back when Gus Van Zant re-made Alfred Hitchcocks 'Psycho'.... and my biggest two problems with that were: 1) it was a classic and you don't touch classics.... 2) it was basically a shot for shot remake, so it had no special signature of Gus Van Zant.... it wasn't until i heard him talk about his reasons behind re-making 'Psycho' that i started to change my opinion.... the way that he explained was something like this: film is like a piece of music.... and people re-make music all the time.... Mozart writes a piece of music and then several other orchastra's and conductors perform it, but with their own take on the piece.... and no one has a problem with this.... how is that any different from a film that's been made....? that's not a word for word quote, i'm just paraphrasing.... however, Gus made a good point with that statement.... and he's exactly right.... there is really no difference between the two art forms.... and therefore, i will give any re-make out there a day in court.... i may take a brief period of time to let the first film settle in before watching the newer one.... and these days it seems like a requirement to do that, as so many films are being re-made and in a shorter amount of time.... such is the case of 'Let The Right One In' and the American re-make 'Let Me In'.... i have stated repeatedly that i thought that 'Let The Right One In' was the best vampire film ever made.... i still stand by that statement.... it's proudly displayed as a part of my DVD collection and i've watched it several times and i get something new out of it each time.... after taking a long time to clear my head, i finally sat down tonight to watch 'Let Me In'.... and i am happy to say that i've formulated an opinion on it.... but first, the plot for those who don't know:
Owen is a 12 year old boy who is scrawny and lonely.... he has no real friends and tends to spend his time alone on the playground in the courtyard of his apartment building.... he's picked on by three older boys and dreams of someday being a tough guy.... one night he notices that some new people are moving in to the apartment next door to him.... an older gentleman and a young girl.... soon the girl, Abby, and Owen strike up a conversation and slowly become friends.... what Owen doesn't know is that Abby and the old man, her caretaker, are not who he thinks they are.... she's a vampire who needs blood to survive and her caretaker goes out to find it for her.... Owen and Abby's friendship continues to grow as things get more complicated in each of their lives.... eventually Abby is on her own and Owen is struggling to find out who he is.... in case you haven't already seen the original or the re-make, i won't spoil the rest of it for you.... but needless to say, both films have the same satisfying ending.... so what did i think....? i'll be honest, i did not have a lot of high expectations and i was very pleasantly surprised when it was over.... although much of this film was almost identical to the original, it was still it's own film.... the director, Matt Reeves, re-created the world of 'Let The Right One In' but for the American audience.... he also translated the source material into a smart piece of cinema.... it holds water on its own and is a nice companion piece to the original film.... the cinematography is beautiful and is as much of a character in the film as the actors are.... these things help set the stage for the true stars of the film, Chloe Grace Moretz and Kodi Smit-McPhee.... they embody the spirits of Abby and Owen and prove that age does not dictate talent.... you forget, at times, that they're only supposed to be 12.... but at the same time, they're obviously young and naive despite the fact that Abby has been 12 years old for a very long time.... these two young actors show amazing promise as to what the future holds for their careers and i look forward to seeing what they do next.... i feel that this film is a fine example of what Gus Van Zant was trying to say.... if the source material is strong (ie: the book) then another director can take their own spin on the story and create another version that is equally as important as the original.... and it leaves the filmgoer the opportunity to decide for themselves which film they perfer or if they like both for different reasons....
this film will be another part of my DVD collection.... and it will sit next to 'Let The Right One In' as a fine example of good filmmaking.... i can't say that all re-makes can accomplish what this one did.... in fact, i think that it's more of a rarity than a rule.... but i'm man enough to say that this film lived up to the hype it received once it was released.... it wasn't without flaws, but the flaws were so minor that the rest of film was not tarnished by them.... the biggest thing that bothered me was the way that Abby looked and moved while attacking people and climbing the tree.... it was obviously CGI and drew attention away from the film.... i don't know exactly how else they could have done it, but the film was obviously backed by a big budget and they could have afforded a bit more time on the special effects.... that was really my only gripe and the one i see most often in film forums.... now, i gave 'Let The Right One In' 5 out of 5 stars.... i gave 'Let Me In' 4 out of 5 stars.... the difference lies in the fact that the original had no seams in it.... i found no flaws with the acting, script, effects, cinematography or directing.... it was pitch-perfect filmmaking and set a standard for what a true artist can do with a little time, money and desire to make a long lasting piece of cinema.... 'Let Me In' came damn close to catching that same lightning in a bottle for a second time.... and if it wasn't for the small segments that bothered me, it would be on the same level as the original.... i can honestly say that these two films compliment each other and show different sides to the same story and fill in some of the blanks that were there in the first film.... (i'm sure the book explains even more.).... so if you're hesitant to rent this film because you love the first one so much, take a little time to let go of your prejudices and then give it an opportunity, you may be surprised at what you find.... and for those who haven't seen either and would rather start with 'Let Me In', you really can't go wrong.... it's a great film.... and a fine example of what American filmmakers can do and that you don't need quick cuts and big explosions to get asses in seats....
there you have it.... proof that one version of a film does not mean that another one can't exist that is almost equally as good.
if you like this, please take time to watch: 'Let The Right One In' and then read the book.
Ah, yes.... the French horror cinema. Yet again another movie from across the pond. It stars Beatrice Dalle and Vincent Gallo in a story of erotica and canniblism. Sounded like an interesting mix and I am a fan of Vincent Gallo, so it seemed like a no brainer. Well, what I didn't count on was the fact that this was from the first half of the 2000's. At that time, the French still felt like a movie had to be pretentious to be good and by my count there hasn't been one good horror movie that was pretentious. I'm not saying that they don't exist, I'm just saying that they're like oil and water.... they don't mix. Now this movie isn't in French, not the whole thing anyway. It's a mix of French and American.... I suppose so Vincent Gallo wouldn't need to learn the language. The cover for the DVD, the stills from the movie and some certain scenes in it were just beautiful. Very well done images of a bloody woman doing different things. All things pointed to a good movie going experience. Well, things didn't work out that way. If this movie had been made last year and was like this, then I might have lost faith in the French horror cinema. Luckily it was from long enough ago that I can forgive the error in judgement. 
This movie was not good. Maybe I missed the point, I hope that was the case. It was just so slow and there was hardly any dialouge and when people did speak, it didn't seem to move the plot along much. A lot of things are implied and a lot of that leads to confusion. The scenes mentioned earlier of blood and the woman are the only parts of this movie that were worthwhile. They're shot in a way that's very flattering even with the subject matter involved. I really wanted to like this movie. It had the recipe for something that could have been great. It's not because it was slow, I like movies that build to a climax no matter how slow. It's not because it was a bit pretentious, movies can be pretentious and still be good. It's not because of the actors, they're good actors.... it was just that they were in a bad movie. 
