Semicharm
There's plenty of other reviews that cover the basic premise of the film, so I'll just get to the point. After watching "Let the Right One In" and now rereading the same reviews that lured me to it, I'm completely befuddled. It seems as though I did not quite see the same film as everyone else. Sure, the film is in Swedish, the scenes and plot points were the same as the reviews described, but I apparently saw the film in a different light. They say it's a love story, I see a tragedy. They say the long wide-angle shots of snow were "atmospheric", where as I felt the scenes were slow, dull, empty--emblematic of so much of what is wrong with the film. Before I get into that, I would say the one thing that I truly liked about the film was Eli. Most modern films of its genre are huge overproduced blockbusters with tons of exposition, backstory, and/or gratuitous gore. Eli stands in absolute contrast. She's shy, enigmatic and, I may say, wonderfully understated. She has very few lines, so most of her story is told through her interactions with other characters and the actress' performance. Eli seems bored, trapped by her circumstances, as I suppose someone in her situation would be. Throughout the film, there are nice little hints and glimpses of her true nature before the "reveal". It shouldn't come as a surprise to those who'd been paying attention. The break from her normally shy and reserved demeanor in the reveal was a bit jarring, I give the film a point for pulling that off as well. Also, beneath her facade of shy innocence is a deceptive manipulator. There's a lot of other clues about Eli that almost no one seemed notice, but I'll get to that in a bit. In spite of her age, I feel the actress gave a solid performance that outshines even her elder castmates. Most of the film, overall, is average at best. The cinematography is "effective" at conveying the story. However, the pace of the film is glacial. While some slow-paced films take their time to build to something, this one seemed more interested in long shots establishing the "mood" than building plot or character. Much of this is to do with editing, how the film budgets its time with various elements. I wanted to know more about the characters and what was going on with them, but no...it feels like those scenes were cut short to make more time for cinematic "atmosphere" or other extraneous filler. For example, all of the scenes with Oskar's dad could just as well had been cut, as he's otherwise not part of the plot and the short phone calls with Oskar's mom said more about him and his relationships than any of his actual screen time. Hell, after all of the time spent with Oskar, the main character of the film, what can one really say about him? He's about middle-school aged, his parents are estranged and living apart, he's bullied by some of the schoolboys, he has a hobby, and a weird neighbor. A lot of his screen time is spent with all these things related to him, but the film says very little about what he thinks or feels. The rest of the performances are mostly average. Some characters were a bit understated and some were melodramatic, but a least they give some insight into their feelings and motivations. However, the lack of depth in Oskar is what really kills the film for me. He portrays very little about himself and rarely reacts to anything unless it affects him directly, in the moment. Even worse, the actor just can't act. I've seen other films with socially challenged characters that still managed to pour much more "character" into their roles. Oskar was as wooden as Pinocchio, only without any aspirations of becoming a boy. The film could have just as well had an actual block of wood stand-in while the actor read his few lines off camera without much consequence to the film. Eli's caretaker is similar to Oskar in many respects, but even he manages to portray more about himself in his few scenes than Oskar does in the entire movie. Also, the plot gives very little motivation behind Oskar. He's mostly a puppet of his circumstances, tumbling through life, lost in his own world until he meets Eli. The main character and actor are crucial to a film's success and Oskar fails to hit any mark. The only things I feel for him are boredom and pity. I pity myself more for haven't been suckered into watching the film. So, what did everyone miss? What makes this a tragedy rather than a romance? Looking at the plot from Eli's side rather than Oscars, things take on a very different perspective. (If I still, somehow, haven't dissuaded you from watching the film, I'll try to avoid any outright spoilers.) Eli's caretaker is an older man, likely in his 60s, who seems to be a little slow, dull, and socially challenged--much like Oskar. Eli's relationship with her caretaker is manipulative and abusive. By coincidence, one night she meets Oskar, who is also a social outcast. Oskar isn't put off by her peculiarities, because he's so desperate to have a friend and otherwise oblivious. Though Eli seems to develop feelings for Oskar too, she repeatedly uses and manipulates him for her own means--things she can't easily do herself. The similarities with Oskar and her caretaker, and Eli's relationships with them, don't seem to be a coincidence. None of this is explicitly said in the movie, as much is done without any real explanation, but there is a lot of subtext.
Woodyanders
Bullied misfit teenager Oskar (a fine and affecting performance by Karle Hedebrant) befriends new neighbor Eli (a haunting and deeply moving portrayal by Lina Leandersson), who's a pallid and enigmatic young lass who only comes out at night. Could Eli be responsible for a spate of disappearances in the area? Director Tomas Alfredson, working from a thoughtful and original script by John Ajvide Lindqvist, relates the engrossing story at a deliberate pace, ably crafts a potently unsettling gloom-doom atmosphere, makes excellent use of the bleak wintry landscape, and grounds the fantastic premise in a plausibly drab mundane reality. Moreover, Alfredson warrants additional praise for keeping the graphic gore to a refreshing minimum and eschewing cheap jump scares in favor of creating and sustaining a quietly discomfiting melancholy tone instead. Better still, the touching friendship between the two oddball main characters gives this picture a surprisingly substantial amount of poignancy and resonance complete with a strong central message on the basic human need for companionship and the bitter lonely price one must pay for immortality. Kudos are also for both Johan Soderquist's spare moody score and Hoyte Van Hoytema's striking widescreen cinematography. An absolute corker.
