Showing posts with label vampire. Show all posts
Showing posts with label vampire. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Tomas Alfredson’s Let the Right One In (2008)


I love being Scandinavian, especially when it comes to taking pride in my homeland. As a Swede, my people have conquered Europe and the North Atlantic as Vikings, made world-famous Swedish meatballs, and, pertaining to your cinematic experience tonight, produced one of the greatest kickassery vampire films ever.

Låt Den Rätte Komma In (Let the Right One In), originally a novel, follows the struggle of a bullied twelve-year-old named Oskar (an extremely common Swedish name, think “John”). When Oskar comes home every day from school, he fantasizes about exacting revenge. One day, Oskar meets a pale (hint hint) girl about his age in appearance named Eli who is living with the man next door. Soon, the two pursue a close relationship.

Eli, who turns out to be a vampire and significantly older than twelve, proves to be in power fast. If you take only one thing away from this movie, remember that girls can wear the pants too. Think of Eli as a feminist superhero as you might Uma Thurman in Kill Bill or Eihi Shiina in Audition, except slightly less realistic considering Eli commits murder after murder in order to survive off of the blood of her victims.

Tonight’s vampire in Let the Right One In holds many similarities to the ever so popular sparkly Twilight vampires, such as pale skin and the need for blood. Not only that, both Edward Cullen and Eli are mysterious, nice to look at, and stereotypically convince the opposite sex that they can never be together, which of course is completely untrue. Then why does Let the Right One In appeal to more than teenage girls? It doesn’t really matter what the story is about in my opinion, but rather how it is told. The romance in Let the Right One In is progressive, whereas the vampire in Twilight immediately decides he must be with the prettiest, dullest girl in school. Another appeal is the action in this film which may or may not make you terrified of little Scandinavian girls (watch out – you do live in the Midwest).

One of the most beautiful characteristics of this film is director Tomas Alfredson’s choice to focus on the relationship between Oskar and Eli rather than make it painfully violent like many American-made horror movies. Honestly, have you ever cared about any of the characters in a movie like Saw? Of course not, you don’t even know who those people are! The only thing you learn about them is their resistance to pain and how bad the actors portraying them are.

If you’re going to enjoy this movie as much as I do, let’s get some things straight: Do not watch the remake of this movie. Hopefully, you haven’t seen it, and if you are lucky, you never will see it. Let Me In, a 2010 American remake of the film you’re seeing tonight, did exactly what I hate about American horror movies. Director Matt Reeves took out the intimate components of human expression and threw in bad horror, along with introducing actors who got their roles because of their looks and not their talent. Stay true to the beauty of an original!

Finally, as you watch Let the Right One In, remember that good things are still coming out of Sweden besides music piracy websites and intense rave music. Just because we don’t participate in World Wars doesn’t mean we are not talented! För Sverige!

Njut!

August King
Film Club

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

F. W. Murnau’s Nosferatu (1922)


How do we watch a silent movie like F. W. Murnau’s Nosferatu (1922)? Really, most film-goers feel the same way about silent film that we feel about rotary phones and typewriters – why would we even spend time on something so technologically out of date? Well, we’re not dealing with a tool here (you don’t use a movie), we’re looking at an art form. One of the problems with film lately is that the technology of it, special effects if you will, seems to have overwhelmed our appreciation of that.

So say this to yourself, out loud (or you can silently mouth it for less ironic effect): silent film is not an antiquated, obsolete method of movie-making. It is a specific form of expression, different from what we are currently used to. Few musicians currently write and perform music using the instrumentation of the western European medieval period (the lute! the sackbut! the hautbois! the vielle!), but that doesn’t mean that the music of that period has no value or that it cannot be appreciated. In fact, it’s pretty cool. And so is silent film.

Here are some things to love about silent film. First, its black and whiteness. Nosferatu is a horror movie, and horror movies are better in black and white. Yes, we know blood looks cooler if it’s actually red, but horror movies are more effective if they don’t show the blood. The original Halloween (1978), for example, avoids any blood, and it’s a slasher movie, but it is scarier than most of the horror that follows it in the genre because so much of takes place in your mind. Psychological horror is freakier than gross-out horror. Black and white further engages the psychological effect of a film because it recedes from the verisimilitude of color, it’s unreal. And horror is all about otherness. What’s more, if you do have blood, isn’t it creepier if it’s black? Tim Burton thought so in Batman Returns (1992).

Second, silent movies are silent. Film-makers struggled for 30 years to sync up sound with image, a technological difficulty that took ingenuity to overcome and didn’t happen until 1925. But in the meantime, the silent approach developed into a laudable form. Watch Singin’ in the Rain (1952) sometime. Underneath its musical plot, it recaps the transition from silent to sound and acknowledges that many great silent actors could not make that transition because their voices weren’t auralgenic.

But look at that phrase: “great silent actors.” What does that mean? It means that actors of the silent era created indelible characters, memorable, expressive, larger-than-life actors like Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, Lillian Gish, Mary Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks, Lon Chaney, Ramon Novarro, Rudolph Valentino, Clara Bow, and on and on. And a lot of them did this with their faces; if you can’t speak out loud, emotion must be communicated through face and physical expression. Watch for this in Nosferatu, how the actors capture love, horror, fear, sadness – the basic human emotions – effortlessly with their faces. Now, this is a bit more expressionistic, or exaggerated for emotional effect, than we’re used to, and that can seem weird. But as we get used to it we realize we’re seeing human emotion more clearly as an element of narrative than we do in modern film.

Finally, one of the modern film-making’s most bothersome elements, to this writer anyway, is the soundtrack, so manipulative, so distracting, so much like a band-aid slapped over a film’s weaknesses or a chaperone that interferes with our engagement with a hot date. In true silent film, film without the ongoing organ accompaniment that would have been improvised and played by an organist, live during the movie, we connect directly with these emotions. All modern DVDs of silent film include musical accompaniment, mostly because contemporary film fans cannot fathom the total absence of sound. We’ll leave the recorded organ accompaniment turned on during tonight’s screening, but imagine if it was just you, and the vampire, alone in a castle room so dark there’s no color, and no one can hear you scream. Because there is no sound.

Happy Halloween!

R. Findlay
Film Club Adviser

Wednesday, November 1, 2006

Ricky Lau's Mr. Vampire (1985)


Zac: Hi, I'm Zac Lutz, co-President of the SPA Film Club.

RF: I'm Randall Findlay, adviser of the SPA Film Club.

Zac: And we're here to discuss Mr. Vampire, a 1980s Hong Kong martial arts vampire comedy horror flick starring Ching-Ying Lam, who has made over 90 martial arts films including Gui Meng Jao, Mi Zong Cheng Long, and Huang Fei-hong Xi Lie Zhi Yi Dai Shi.

RF: Wow. I didn't know you spoke Chinese. What's Mr. Vampire about?

Zac: Mr. Vampire is a movie that is both exciting and funny while still trying to be nothing but itself, something that seems increasingly rare in modern film. It is about a man, who is a sort of vampire-expert priest guy in charge of the morgue and who sports an aggressive uni-brow. It's also about his two assistants, whose names are strangely very American. The two assistants are quite easy to relate to, as they keep on trying to do their work right, but constantly mess up or fool around, and yet the morgue master guy keeps them around for some reason.

RF: Man, you're right about that uni-brow. I see that the sequel to this movie, and there are five, is entitled One-Eyebrow Priest. And he's a great martial arts master. But he does leave a lot be desired when it comes to hiring employees. The whole plot in Mr. Vampire is moved along by the incompetence of the people who work for him.

Zac: In a way, this seems to be a sort of underlying idea, that despite the comically bumbling nature of the assistants, the morgue master guy still sees how they try so hard to please him, and most of the time they manage to do things right. All of the characters in Mr. Vampire work together very well, and their relationships to one another are definitely believable.

RF: It is interesting that you would say that. After all, the genre of this film is fantasy. I mean, hopping vampires, seductive ghosts, bumbling servants who release zombies because they're screwing around rather than doing their job! Realism is a noun I wouldn't have applied to this film, or the others in the same genre, like Sammo Hung's Close Encounters of the Spooky Kind.

Zac: As far as that goes, there aren't really any parts that seem cheesily unrealistic except for the ghost lady who shows up a bit later and a bit randomly.

RF: Point taken. I remember the first time I saw the film. I saw the vampires hopping, and I started laughing out loud. I thought it was so funny. But at the same time, it's a little creepy. How would you rate this film?

Zac: The vampires themselves are actually fairly menacing, and their stiff hopping seems quite natural as far as how a dead person might move. Overall, the story is easy to follow, although the beginning is a bit confusing, as well as the introduction of the ghost lady, and some of the translations are rather abrupt.

RF: Speaking of abrupt, that's all the time we have. Enjoy the film!

Zac Lutz and R. Findlay
Film Club