Funny how a genre film, a vampire film is being attacked for sloppy filmmaking for featuring CGI kitties. The emotions of the film are so incredibly realistic and that's why anything "fake" on the surface could throw you off. The film's color palette is very restricted, the whole world the film wraps around seems so far away, a lost town from some winter fantasy. A white French poodle in the white snow encountering a man hung upside down bleeding, cats deforming into killers, looking very animated...think of it like The Night of the Hunter, with its gloriously child-like/cartoonish treatment of the world surrounding the main children - half real half way off.

That is precisely why it bothered me, it was building so beautifully and they throw that scene in. It definitely caught me off guard. But again, I loved the film and still see it as a genre masterpiece. It is just strange how the filmmaking could be so realistic up to that point and they decide to throw something like that it. I was offended by it to be quite honest.

The film was so beautiful that even an homage to a traditional vampire film would just me an insult to the project. Especially one that took away from the atmosphere. All I know is that when it happened I felt immediately offended and upset.

Like I said, I don't have that much of an issue with the cats per se since the whole subplot with characters out of the background in a Roy Andersson or Kaurismaki movie involves a certain degree of suspension of disbelief for being less real than the main characters. Not that I'm complaining, I find it a beautiful way to point out the children as being far more mature than the grown-ups (furthermore, grown-ups that are fangs fodder).
So. Killer kitties are both charming and disquieting. All moviscope is pointing out is he wishes the CGI wasn't such a rush job.

I knew this thread would turn into a discussion about cats.

He took the words right out of my mouth.

I'm sorry you're no longer the only person in the world who feels this way about CGI kitties.

It is encouraging to see that I wasn't the only one pissed that the filmmakers did that with such an amazing film.

Finally got to see the film for a second time down here in L.A. at the Laemmle Sunset 5, and I still love everything about it. The title, the cats, the ending, everything. But I swear up and down that the film's soundtrack has been augmented since the festival screening where I first saw it. I could be wrong, but I don't remember there being any bass heavy bombastic sound effects leading up to and during the kill scenes -- can anyone else corroborate this? Maybe the sound in that first theatre was crappy compared to this one, but I thought the soundtrack was fairly restrained during those scenes, making the horror all the more chilling. But now it feels like they are punctuating the scenes with all the subtlety of being hit in the head with a hammer. "They" as in the distributor I presume, and not the director. (I hope!)

Galen, I believe your first theater must have had crappy sound.

You're probably right. The difference is stunning though. Damn, I need to go see it again!

yes, it seemed something like Fulci would have thrown into a film of his as pure shock, here though, minus the over the top gore.

I thought the monochrome cinematography worked effectively to the film's advantage.

I desperately need to see this again. Thinking back on it the morning after is like grasping at wisps of a beautiful dream; because of the remarkable way it was filmed I feel like I saw most of the film out of the corner of my eye, periodically through a veil of tears. I was moved in ways that I really can't articulate, and I appreciate the thoughts left here by others who have seen it, they help me gather up my own...! My only only complaint, and it's not a particularly fair one at that... is that the subplots, especially that with the bitten woman, took me away from the lovely and precious spell that Eli and Oskar cast over me. I remember distinctly being disappointed, hmmph!ing in my head when the film cut away to the man in bed with his wife, grieving for his friend. I had eyes only for Oskar & Eli!

How an actress as young as Lina Leandersson can be so perfect is beyond me.

I can't wait to see it again.

For me, this was the best [live action] film of the year so far. I've never been quite as entranced by the performance of a young actress, and while I definately have a nitpick or two......there was still a lot to be enjoyed here. Another film to add to my favorite films in the "real life depictions of mythical afflictions" genre, along with Ginger Snaps. In a weak year, it's great to see that films like this can get a packed audience on a Wednesday night, as this one did last night.

Sadly, we have this shit to deal with (from the director of last year's most grating film):

Matt Reeves to remake Let the Right One In
Also: Reeves gives a terrible explanation as to why he thinks this is a good idea

A wonderful film... & having it still freshly in my head, it feels doubly awful to see that it's already lined up for a crappy remake (I know, shouldn't prejudge, but the quote linked-to there does not inspire much hope). Sigh.

Re: the husband:


Despite minor caveats, it's still one of the best things I've seen this year.

Has anyone read the novel from which this was adapted?

In fact, I like Matt Reeves' explanation. I even consider it the only reason I'd accept for anyone to remake the film. If I were a filmmaker, I'd remake it too without a second thought, for the same principle.

I got the novel a few days ago and have now donated it to the library. The writing is pedestrian at its best and trite at its worst. Lots of useless information and unnecessary backstory. The staging of the penultimate scene makes completely no sense. Tomas Alfredson has adapted a horrible book into a great movie.

Thanks for that information. Interesting, considering it was the author himself who wrote the film's screenplay!

Yeah, that's the reason I got interested in the novel. Who knows? Maybe I have lost all my literary skills after years of film watching, so don't let my quick dismissal prevent you from having your own experiences.

Me from a page back:


Matt Reeves:


Regardless of our similar take on the film, this is such a horrible idea. Cloverfield is pretty much everything wrong with cinema.

I couldn't get through Cloverfield after 20 min.

This is the best film I've seen so far this year, both haunting and charming in its depiction of a lonely child in need of friendship. The cold climate of Sweden combined with Leandersson's incredible performance create an eerie ambiance that aided the film well. I just can't get over Leandersson's distant gaze and almost zombie-like walk as she moves about, each time Eli was in attack mode I was thrown by how contrasting her violent side was with her "normal" side, truly effective in every conceivable way.

Ah, that's what I thought, a truly interesting parallel.

That's exactly the reading I had too.

Another thing that I gather was emphasized in the book and was only alluded to in the movie with a couple of lines and a two second shot was the fact that:



I read an interview with the director which mentioned that he shot scenes that made this more explicit, but decided to cut them.