New Moon

So, if you haven't completely disowned me, and are curious to hear further reports from enemy territory, I have collected my thoughts on Stephenie Meyer's second novel in the Twilight series, New Moon.

As the intensely intense love story of Edward and Bella continues, certain patterns start to emerge that on the surface seem innocuous, but the more I think about them, the more I'm sort of disturbed by how this coupling is portrayed.

At the beginning of the book, the Cullens throw a birthday bash for 18 year old Bella, who has suddenly become obsessed with aging the way I did when I turned 25 and realized a quarter of my life had gone by without me noticing. However, in my experience, most 18 year olds aren't so aware of their aging since they've only just gotten their license, the right to vote, and can buy cigarettes, but not alcohol, and they have all that lovely disposable income from not paying bills or mortgages or buying their own food. But Bella is super cranky about turning 18 because perfect Edward is forever 17, and God help us should she age a few years and look slightly older than Ed for the rest of their love story. Because women aren't obsessed with aging as it is, and now we have a weird fantasy metaphor reiterating how men aging is more accepted and lauded than women ('cause we all get saggy and crusty with liver spots all over everything, WE ARE REALLY JUST ALL HIDEOUS CRONES-IN-TRAINING). So Bella's neurotic anxiety attacks about aging is more than a little irritating.

ANYWHOO, so she's grumpy about getting old, and is one of those people who hates people celebrating their birthday (and those people piss me off, chill out, it's just a great excuse to get our party on, DON'T TAKE THAT AWAY FROM US, PARTY POOPER), but she begrudgingly allows the Cullens to throw a little get-together, and she cuts herself on the wrapping paper of a gift (Seriously? The wrapping paper?) and the scent of the blood sends the younger vampires into a tizzy, and perfect Edward's solution to get Bella out of harm's way is to throw her into a mirror on the other side of the room, sending a shower of broken glass and splintered furniture all over her fragile person. CONGRATS ED, YOU JUST WON THE BRILLIANT STRATEGY AWARD OF THE DAY. At any rate, the party is ruined and Ed uses this little mishap as an excuse to run from this relationship. Just like a guy to think up any excuse to avoid commitment.

At this point, I had a few questions. Granted, vampires have a super keen sense of smell as predators, and Meyer established the feeding frenzy mentality when they get their chompers into you, but how does one "blend in with society" if a PAPERCUT causes them to go berserk and launch themselves towards the potential food source, fangs bared and eyes rolled back in their heads like great white sharks? Walking around a high school, or just through this mountain town (which is probably a logger mecha), how does one avoid every person with a scratch or cut? You can't. This plot device is dumb.

Furthermore, as a matured female that produces eggs and goes through the life cycle, how does our darling Bella handle being without Eddie for five days while she rides the crimson wave? I don't care what kind of contraptions you use during that time of the month, if you aren't supposed to be near a lion while menstruating, you sure as hell shouldn't be within fifty miles of a vampire.

Speaking of being without Eddie, you may or may not know that this is the novel where Edward wrenches himself from Bella's cloying grasp, taking his whole family with him, Bella's only other support system. According to him, it's to "protect" Bella, to keep her safe from any more incidents like her birthday party, because she is just a fragile, breakable human, and he refuses to turn her into a vampire for his own internally righteous reasons.

"Sorry babe, gotta go, you've got a few too many crow's feet for my liking."

It's titled New Moon to describe the darkest period of Bella's life, life without Edward. Prior to his well-timed departure, Bella insists that Edward spend every evening next to her while she sleeps. One could read a lot into this, and I'm more than a little uncomfortable with her physical dependency on him, not dissimilar to a drug habit, and the way he cradles her like a child ALL THE TIME. This point is really driven home in a scene (though I can't remember which book this takes places in) where she's mad at him for all of fifteen seconds, then backs down and leaves the window open, inviting him into her bed. I hate that she had every reason to be pissed at him, but there is nothing she can do to punish him for being stupid like you do with normal dudes, both because she doesn't have much to threaten him with and because she can't hold her ground against him for any significant length of time. Who taught her how to be a woman? When your dude is being a pain in the ass, you stay mad at him for a few days, not telling him why you're pissed, until he figures it out for himself and apologizes proper-like. She is full of fail. It really illustrates one of the more disturbing aspects of their relationship, the one where it trips down the very fine line between THE MOST INTENSE LOVE EVER and AN UNHEALTHY DRUG ADDICTION.

So you can imagine the kind of withdrawal she goes through when Edward takes off.

Now, if you see the movie, you will probably hate Bella with all your soul for being so psycho about Ed leaving. The revolving shot with Bella staring out the window as the seasons change is especially ridiculous. The book is a bit more subtle, and though she goes through catatonic depression for two weeks, Bella makes an effort to maintain the illusion of normalcy so Charlie doesn't worry too much about her. She doesn't do it very well, but give her a sticker for trying. However, the screaming nightmares (and I'm talking about the kinds that shake the windows) are pulled directly out of the book. I maintain that sympathies should lie with Charlie, not Bella, especially since the nightmare isn't particularly scary, AT ALL. The whole situation is overdone, yet nauseatingly familiar, since I once was a teenage girl. I suppose Meyer's point is that Bella doesn't get over Edward's absence like any normal girl because he is her one true love (gag). Personally, I don't believe in one true love; which is why I suppose I find the whole thing a tad ridiculous. Especially since Meyer brings Jacob Black into the mix, the poor, puppy-love ridden hot Indian, someone with whom Bella finds comfort and distraction from her broken heart.

Who's the saddest not-a-werewolf?

When you get dumped and you are naturally super sad about it, and outside of enough time to forget how bad it hurt, the best remedy is a new love interest. And precocious, adorably shirtless Jacob fits the bill to a "T." But you know what Bella does? She breaks out the old, "I love you, but I'm not IN love with you." Because she's still hung up on Edward, Mr. I Know What's Best For You, Always. GAHHHHHH. The second Edward is back in the picture, she breaks that hot Indian's heart after using him like a sexy elixir to make herself feel better. She even tells Jacob that given the choice, she will ALWAYS choose Edward over him.

OUCH.

So, Edward abandons Bella for her own safety, which in fact puts her directly in danger, from both herself, getting into dangerous situations so she can have all those indignant arguments with phantom Edward that she'd never have with the real thing, and vengeful psycho vampire Victoria, who has decided to hit Edward where it hurts for killing her mate James in the first book by torturing and murdering HIS mate, i.e. Bella. Again, Edward, first place trophy for you. Thankfully, the hot and totally ripped not-a-werewolf Indians are on top of things during the Cullens' absence.

Energetic after-school program or sexy not-a-werewolf cult?

Now, we come to an interesting crossroads. Edward and Jacob are polar opposites, cold and hot, calmly composed and heatedly passionate, icy white and warm mocha brown. Edward is, allegedly, completely selfless, putting Bella's safety and well-being above his own happiness. Jacob, though sweet and loyal, has no compunction about throwing a hissy fit and laying down the guilt trip, even lying to manipulate Bella into getting his way. But realistically, Jacob offers the better choice: One doesn't have to abandon their entire family to protect their now-undead life status or watch friends and loved ones die as they live forever. You would be free to live life in near normalcy, compared to the lengths vampires have to take to keep themselves hidden.

BUT. Both are overprotective of Bella and are convinced that they know what's best for her. Both tread through the dangerous territory of romanticized domestic abusers:
Edward is a little more controlling than your average insecure dude. He makes major decisions without asking for Bella's input, he keeps tabs on her movements and who she spends her time with, he tries to tell her who she can and can't hang out with, he thinks he knows what's best for her, and to be with him she has to give up contact with her family.
Jacob is an emotional manipulator, he could lose his temper and maul someone at any time, he will lie to get what he wants, and he doesn't feel bad about hurting people he doesn't like.
Meyer tries to justify their behavior through their supernatural status and the fact that Bella is pretty much under constant threat of death and dismemberment, but because she sets up both males as the ideal for masculinity, these aspects of their personalities are a bit disturbing. This may be something you need to read for yourself and see what you think.



So at the end of New Moon, Bella saves Edward's life and she immediately forgives him for all the bullshit he's put her through because he's so wracked with guilt and despair without her that he was going to commit suicide. HOW SWEET. And yes, the Romeo and Juliet allusions are there, and guess what? Romeo and Juliet were morons. They made SEVERAL bad decisions. Guess who else keeps making bad decisions?

On the positive, this book isn't all that bad, and we get to see some intense Indians do some damage. But the ride ain't over. And neither is the crazy drama. Not only is Victoria still out there, circling her prey, but now the vampire police (Volturi) are on the Cullens' asses about having a human gal pal. Whoo! Who's got some conflict all up ins?

THESE GUYS.

Twilight, dangit.

Twilight. It was a word that used to bring a sense of atmosphere, a witching hour, full of mystery and husky colors. But now, it has another meaning. A series of books written by the Mormon version of Anne Rice have arrested all use of the word and have somehow made teenage girls even more detestable. However, before I launch into yet another tirade, I’m going to put my money where my mouth is. It’s time for me to suppress my gag reflex and read the novels for myself.

That’s right, I’m taking one for the home team.

From here on out, I will be critiquing Stephenie Meyer’s teen vampire, disturbingly obsessive, love story (I may have to take a few breaks and read the dictionary to stop the screaming in my head).

Let the games begin.



Wow. Okay. Now, I’ll say this: it’s not as bad as I was anticipating. But I have to qualify that by saying, I was expecting a horrid pile of shit. No, specifically, I was expecting the scribblings of a thirteen year old. What I got was the wet dream of a seventeen year old.

Hang on, I need to pause for pie. PUMPKIN PIE.

Delicious.
So, as I was saying, this is essentially a trashy romance novel for teens (despite the thirty to forty year old women I see walking around wearing Twilight t-shirts. UGH.) The writing isn’t terrifically refined, nor particularly inventive. BUT, as holders of the double-X chromosomes, ROMANCE tends to be a bigger magnet than you would think. Boys, being romantic, as only a woman could think up, hits us right in the ovaries, nearly every time. You really have to do some serious uteran crunches to build up a tolerance/immunity to sappy/predictable romance. I’ll admit that I own both Bridgit Jones’ Diary films, and that I have watched 2 Weeks Notice. Don’t judge me. Cary Grant is our kryptonite and Richard Gere makes us tingle in special places. But I’m off-topic; the fact is, romance outsells most other genres, and when you throw vampires in the mix, sexy, sexy vampires, you’ve got a bestseller.

Vampires are the quintessential bad boys; they’re dangerous and brooding, and they feel every emotion to the furthest degree of feeling. They have their own place with French furniture, fast cars or bikes, rock the metrosexual look, and will occasionally flip out and yell, but then feel really bad about it later. But they can’t allow themselves to LOVE because they’re monsters without souls and they’re going to live forever, blah blah blah, and so they’re miserable, but BY GOD, all the ladies are wetting their pants for a crack at one of those fixer-uppers. Because every chick thinks that she will be the one to show the bad boy how to love and turn his life around and be taken along for the sexy vampire ride.

So it just figures that every ten years a series of vampire novels comes around and chicks flip their shit, but this…this is on the far side of ridiculous.

To be fair, let me say this: the movies are not the books. The movies, and please believe me when I say this, really distort and discolor the characters and the tone of the books. Kristen Stewart needs a slap in the mouth and a steak. Robert Pattinson needs a little less product in his hair and needs to remember that his dog didn't just die.

The characters in the film are pretty much awful in comparison to the ones in the book. Bella actually closes her mouth and doesn’t act like a half-dead fish; bland, frigid, and extremely unlikeable. The Bella in the book has a bit of a sense of humor, and can usually dole out as much as she takes, verbally, when she isn’t distracted by how pretty Edward is. She takes care of her dad and is a little more grounded than most teenage girls, though occasionally just as dumb (we can only ask for so much).

I remember watching the movie and being struck by how selfish and unthinking Bella was; she allows her hormones to supersede anything else, and whatever gets in the way of that causes her to go completely mental. The whole time I was thinking, “God I wish her dad would just ship her ass off to an all-girls Catholic school.” But the other Bella is a bit more sympathetic and puts a lot of effort into taking care of Charlie (the dad); she spends the second half of the book frantic about his and her mother’s safety after Bella is targeted as particularly enticing prey by expert hunter and vampire James. And what I appreciated most was that she was entirely aware of how unreasonable and insane the whole mess is. She knows that falling that hard in love with someone, a vampire, no less, this early in life is completely bonkers (which it is). But when you’ve got the romantic equivalent to heroin, what are you going to do?

Edward also has a pretty sharp sense of humor to match his fangs, and can express caring and sympathy, rather than just look like he ate something unpleasant or got kicked in the junk. And guess what? They both SMILE and LAUGH every once in a while, and most of the dramatic stuff they do isn’t nearly as lame and core shuddering as the movie makes it out to be (though the dazzling sparkle-reveal is still a little bit silly).

Meyer hits on a few real, painfully familiar adolescent traits, which I will begrudgingly give her credit for. Bella’s anger and frustration causing her to cry without being able to stop no matter how much she tries to control her emotions is something that I can identify with (I cry during children’s movies, I just can’t help it). Teenagers being petty and jealous and awkward as fuck is pretty par for any high school, and becoming disillusioned with adults and feeling the need to take care of them is part of growing up. And, God help us, we all remember that guy that made us insane with desire, to the point of performing some desperate stalking. And if you don’t, you’re probably suppressing some serious criminal activity.

She also, somehow, don't ask me how, works in some Adam and Eve symbolism. How did she do that? And not poorly? DAMMIT.

HOWEVER.

Meyer has the terrible habit of recycling her adjectives, repeating the same descriptions in a girly whisper of awe. If you took all the descriptions of Edward’s ice cold beauty and immaculate perfection and put it in one place, it sounds like the ravings of Dustin Hoffman’s character in Rain Man . This was something that bothered me a good deal; Edward is so PERFECT OH MY GOD IMPOSSIBLY PERFECT, and personally, I think people that look like “models out of a magazine” or “movie stars” are BLAND. They’re boring. There’s nothing interesting about their looks, a symmetrical blank piece of flesh with nothing to look at except the designated topography. Who the hell wants that? Blah.

She has a better grasp of the dialogue, but there are those moments every now and then that you have to pause and go, “Did I really just read that? Did I REALLY just read that?”


Passages that made me go, “WAT?” (Yes, “what” without the “h,” to really emphasize the “AHHHHHH”):

Edward: "...I'm tired of trying to stay away from you, Bella."
AUUUUUGGGGHHHHHH.

My sense of direction was hopeless; I could get lost in much less helpful surroundings...
I think you mean "more helpful," as getting lost in less helpful surroundings is pretty much expected.
...The trail would deeper and deeper into the forest, mostly east as far as I could tell.
...Did-didn't you just say you don't know directions?

Because when I thought of him, of his voice, his hypnotic eyes, the magnetic force of his personality, I wanted nothing more than to be with him right now.
I...uh...isn't this pretty much illustrating you as the easiest prey around?

By dint of much elbow grease…
Though this is grammatically correct, I have NEVER heard anyone use "dint" in this context. I maintain that no one should use it in this context, as it sounds hella weird.

I pulled all my hair over my head, letting it fan out on the quilt above me, and focused again on the heat that touched my eyelids, my cheekbones, my nose, my lips, my forearms, my neck, soaked through my light shirt…
Whoa, Bella, I'm not the one you need to seduce, 'kay?

He lay perfectly still in the grass, his shirt open over his sculpted, incandescent chest, his scintillating arms bare.
That's better.

“I’ll leave some things for cold-cut sandwiches in the fridge…”
Bella, maybe this is a regional thing. But 'round here, no one says "Cold-cut sandwiches" unless they're over sixty.

I parked in the last row and hurried to English, arriving breathless, but subdued, before the final bell.
I get it, but it seems unnecessary.


Important points:
No one with long hair uses rubber bands to tie back their hair unless they’re left with no alternative OR they are weathered old Hells Angels.

The blurb on the back cover misquotes the text.

Bella, no one winks except creepy old men and people with bad tics.

DAZZLE. Use it once, shame on me. Use it four times in a row, shame on you.




And so, one book down, three to go. Onward and upward!

Big ups to our fangy friends lurking in your local bellfry

My apologies, dear reader, for not updating with the promised vampire goodies as soon as I would have liked. I was distracted by Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, quickly followed by Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. I’m sure you understand.

Well, dear reader, this has been a very enlightening post-project. I finally found some sites that list more than just Underworld and Interview with a Vampire as “the greatest vampire films E-VAR!” I rediscovered some old favorites and a few films that could be just as good as Let the Right One In. So let’s get to it, shall we?

First off, I’d like to trot out some of my favorite 80’s and 90’s comedy-camp-vamp films.

My Best Friend is a Vampire
Oh my, this takes me back.

Is it time to bring back the giant shoulder-pads and crispy hair that is supposed to look wet?

Starring Robert Sean Leonard of Dead Poets Society and grizzled-beardy television hit House, Rene Auberjonois (probably best recognized as Odo from Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, but who has a very extensive voice-over credit list, including many Disney favorites), and David Warner (the perpetual bad guy, including THE LOBE!), this 1988 gem would actually be a great pairing with Buffy the Vampire Slayer; they follow a similar storyline formula where you have unsuspecting, “normal” teen who has a critical event and gains a new status: Vampire/Vampire Hunter, as well as gaining an arch-nemesis: Vampire Hunter/Vampire, and a dusty mentor. I haven’t seen this movie in far too long, but as a kid I would rent it over and over again from the local video store, so essentially I’ve had a crush on Robert Sean Leonard long before any of you schmucks.

Once Bitten

This 1985 breakout for Jim Carrey is one of the decade’s many notches in the sex-comedy genre. The plot hinges on the ancient vampire Lauren Hutton seeking out a virgin’s blood to drink to keep her young, but in this modern age, teenagers are sluts and virgins are scarce. Enter goofy loser Jim Carrey, who is woefully unbesmirched thanks to his prude of a girlfriend. It pretty much explains itself, and you get to see glimpses of Jim Carrey’s comedy evolution. Spoiler: He gets laid.

Love Bites

::shrug::He likes it with the brace on.

Holy cow, this movie is pretty bad, but still so good! Released in 1993, we’ve hit the age of Wall Street yuppie-ism, coasting on a booming market, cell phones, and LOTS OF HAIR GEL. Crashing directly into it is 1800s British vampire Zachary Sims, played by Adam Ant (the musician, not a children’s book character). The plot: quintessential 90’s lady accidentally falls into his crypt from her apartment built over said crypt, makes friends, and helps him adapt to the twentieth century, eventually helping him become human again (bet you didn’t know vampires could do that, huh?). Guess what? She falls in love with him along the way!

You guys, this movie is so cheesy, you’re going to need plenty of tortilla chips and salsa handy, but Adam Ant makes it more or less pretty awesome. He’s adorable, people, and he has an ACCENT, we women are putty in his dainty British fingers. His electro-synth-pop is pretty kick-ass as well, check it out!

Dracula: Dead and Loving It



This 1995 spoof has a fantastic cast: Mel Brooks, Leslie Nielsen, Peter MacNicol, Steven Webber, Amy Yasbeck, I tell you it’s SO GOOD. Occasionally, there will be a joke that falls a little flat, but oh my crap, it’s Mel Brooks, it’s pretty damn funny.

Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter
Delightfully low-budget, the tag-line for this film is The first testament says "an eye for an eye." - The second testament says "love thy neighbour." - The third testament ... Kicks Ass!!! The second coming of Jesus is fraught with renegade vampires and motorcyclin’ lesbian ninjas, blaspheming and small explosions. You’ll laugh so hard, the consecrated wine that is the blood of Christ will shoot out of your nose.

Tip: You will probably have to hit up NetFlix or a local independent video rental store to find this corker.


So! I suppose it’s on to some serious business!

Night Watch and it’s sequel Day Watch



This breakout hit from Russia single-handedly revived the Russian film industry. Set in present-day Moscow, we follow Anton, a member of the Night Watch and the side of Light, who must keep an eye on those of the Dark side to keep the uneasy truce struck between the two hundreds of years ago. However, the head of the Dark side is looking for a way to tip the scales of power via the child Yegor, a Great One, a being of great potential power who could help swallow the world into darkness should he choose to join the Dark side.

These films are best watched in Russian with English subtitles, which are actually rather creatively used at certain points in the movie, dissolving like blood or revealed in the wake of a character’s path. And though the film isn’t strictly “vampire” or completely wrapped up in vampire lore, there are vampire members on the Dark side who play a part in the downfall of mankind. BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT THEY’RE HERE FOR. JUST LOOK AT THE TWILIGHT FRANCHISE.

Dracula’s Daughter and Nadja



Dracula’s Daughter, released in 1936, was a sequel to 1931’s Dracula. With some lesbian overtones (who doesn’t love those?), the film follows Dracula’s daughter Countess Marya after her father’s death as she attempts to shed her vampirism and become human again. Included in the plot is Van Helsing, who has been arrested for murdering the Count. Though it didn’t do too well at the box office, it received positive reviews, and is at least worth seeing as source material for Nadja.

Nadja (1994) may only appeal to people like my pal Kyle, who revels in the strange, the bizarre, and the David Lynch. A post-modern reworking of Dracula’s Daughter, Lynch acted as producer and has a cameo as a morgue receptionist, so if you’re the kind of person that enjoyed trying to untie the Gordian knot that was Muholland Drive and watched every episode of Twin Peakes, then you just may want to check this out.

Immortality, also known as The Wisdom of Crocodiles

This movie probably sucks. However, it stars Jude Law as a vampire. Ladies, and a few of you gentlemen, decide for yourselves.

Cronos



I adore chubby writer/director Guillermo Del Toro, and was unaware that he and Ron Perlman go way back, before Ron was our favorite brick-red and horned superhero, all the way to 1995 where they worked on this intriguing commentary on old age grasping at any promise of youth. Instead of a vampire bite, the “disease” is introduced via a mechanical golden scarab housing an insect that produces a solution that makes the infected person young again. However, the price to be paid is a hunger for blood.

The main character is horrified, but unwilling to part with the magical scarab. Ron Perlman portrays a thug sent to steal the youth-giving device, which looks like a marked improvement than that episode of Beauty and the Beast I saw recently. (Linda Hamilton, I hate you.)



Dracula: Pages from a Virgin’s Diary


WARNING: ART FILM! WARNING: SILENT! WARNING: BLACK AND WHITE! WARNING: BALLET!

Okay, now that we’ve got that out of the way, I’m intrigued by this 2002 take on the original Bram Stoker novel as portrayed by the Royal Winnipeg Ballet. Complete with title cards and other tricks of the silent film trade, this film seems like a delightful combination of old and new, including a Chinese Dracula and selective use of color. Who doesn’t want to see a Chinese Dracula dancing on his toes, wooing a chick straight out of Swan Lake?

Near Dark


As a card-carrying feminist, I have to applaud writer/director Kathryn Bigelow. It’s hard enough getting backing for a movie written and directed by a woman, not to mention a film that’s a western vampire horror fest. Starring the underused Bill Paxton, Lance Henriksen, and the then-unknown Adrian Pasdar (devilishly handsome Nathan Petrelli on Heroes), this movie stretches the conventions of the classic western and horror genres. There’s a traveling band of criminal vampires wreaking havoc on the small towns remotely scattered throughout the west who bring forced vampire-in-training Caleb into their fold; though Caleb is now a vampire, he clings to his humanity, and can’t bring himself to kill to eat. The fanged gang commits more and more depraved acts to force Caleb to become like themselves (an initiation ritual to cement Caleb to them and ensure his trustworthiness), which actually serves to push Caleb further away. The critical tipping point for Caleb occurs when his “new family” runs into his actual family, and Caleb must choose sides.

Granted, I haven’t seen this movie, but Bill Paxton is so crazy, I absolutely must. Of all the places in America for these vampires to roam, they choose…the desert. That small fact lets you know right off that these guys are BATSHIT. Not to mention Lance Henriksen is one of the most sinister Civil War vets I’ve seen in a while.

Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens , Nosferatu the Vampyre, Shadow of the Vampire



We’ve all heard of Nosferatu, but I was unaware of how extensive its influence is on the vampire genre. Directed by F.W. Murnau in 1922, this expressionist film was an adaptation of Bram Stoker’s Dracula, but had to make several changes to the story because they couldn’t secure the rights to the novel. Shot on a shoestring budget, the film created one of the two vampire archetypes: the vile and repulsive rat-like count versus the more common Dracula-type: the sexually charged aristocrat with a heightened power of seduction. In Murnau’s film, Count Orlock is a slithering, sneaking corpse with elongated fingers and fangs, huge eyes, and no hair.

When he travels to Hutter’s home to capture Ellen, he brings with him a ship full of rats chock full o’ the plague. Everything about him is so vile and lowly, one could almost feel pity for him for having to live such a wretched existence. In this respect, Count Orlock has more in common with Frankenstein than Dracula.

The other historic detail of vampire lore created by this film is the Count’s fear of sunlight. Prior to Nosferatu, vampires disliked sunlight, but could tolerate it; Stoker’s Dracula even takes a stroll through town during the day (though I’m sure the constant English fog and canopy of coal smoke helped screen out the direct rays). But in Nosferatu, Ellen offers herself to Orlock to distract him while the sun comes up, causing him to disintegrate. For a creature that is such an antithesis to light and goodness, it’s a natural fit, and I find it surprising that no one thought of it sooner.

A point of interest, this definitive vampire movie was almost lost forever; despite changing names and plot, Stoker’s descendents still sued for copyright infringement and won. Part of the settlement was that all copies of the film be destroyed, but by that point, the film was so far-flung, it had been copied by enthusiasts and continued to live on. Suck on that, Stoker!

Now then, Nosferatu was a gold star in what could be called a troubled history for Germany, so, naturally, German director Werner Herzog (Vehr-nahr Hair-zog) made a tribute version, combining Nosferatu and Stoker’s original Dracula. Collaborating with the intensely insane, but intensely intense Klaus Kinski (Klowse Kin-skie) in one of five epic projects, Herzog expands the plot and delves deeper into the Count’s pitiable pathos of loneliness in the face of immortality. If you’ve never seen a Herzog/Kinski film, do yourself the favor; as a side-note, this movie was shot both in German and in English, but most critics lean towards the German version as the actors are more confidant delivering their lines in their native language.

If you know anything about Herzog (the man who ate a shoe in front of an auditorium full of film students on a bet), then this shouldn’t surprise you: in the city where they were shooting, Herzog was forbidden to release the 11,000 rats that were collected for a particular scene. So they relocated to another town, released the rats and shot the scene, but the population of rats exploded to 30,000. Children of the town skipped school for weeks to collect rats in exchange for the bounty placed on their tiny heads.
Fun Fact: Herzog is terrified of chickens, but has them in his movies, probably for some obscure, artistic reason. See if there are any in this one.

And the final block in this trifecta is Shadow of the Vampire, starring John Malkovich as F.W. Murnau and Willem Dafoe as Max Schreck. The plot: Murnau, with his crew under the impression that Schreck is just a very dedicated method actor, has hired a real vampire to star in his movie with his female lead as payment, provided Schreck cooperates and finishes the film. However, as the filming goes on, Schreck becomes increasingly erratic and hard to control, munching on crew members between takes.

Personal story-time: this movie was billed as a “black comedy” when it was released, and when I went to see it with my mom (my faithful movie-going companion), I was expecting lots of laughs. I WAS SO WRONG TO EXPECT THAT. While there are a few chuckle-worthy moments, this is foremost a horror-psychological drama-type thing, and you will be sorely disappointed if you think it’s going to be giggle-times. Also, Willem is fucking terrifying. He is even more so in this movie. (Just joshing, Willem, I love your craggy face)


So, gotdamned, kids! That was a lot of movies! We actually just barely scratched the surface here, but you know, it’s my blog, I’ll do what I want. I’m sorry for the delay, but this seriously took me a week to research and write. So be grateful.

For further vampire interest, check out these sites:
Snarkerati’s Top 70 Vampire Movies of All Time
Collection of Vampire Filmography: for all those delicious Christopher Lee Dracula flicks!

Oh man, next time, This ‘N That Tuesday!

Your first kiss was smothered in blood? Man, we've all been there!

Imagine, dear reader, that you are chained in a dungeon. The grimy prison guard in all-too-small leather underpants is steadily whipping your slightly numb, yet still stinging back. His flabby arms undulate and his glistening belly heaves as his hand brings down the braid over and over. You weep rock salt and perhaps you wish for death. Yet all around you, the other prisoners beam beatifically at their torturers, writhing in ecstasy though they receive the same beating as you. You are perplexed, but can only assume that the others have snapped and believe that the painful and degrading is pleasant and enjoyable.

Dear reader, that is what it was like to watch Twilight.

Now, imagine then that your torture suddenly ends and you fall into a cooling bath of aloe, and a Heroes-era David Bowie is sponging your wounds while Kate Winslet feeds you Italian pastries. That is what it was like to watch Let the Right One In.



The genre of vampire movies, though large, is woefully lacking in truly excellent films. No matter how strong these films may be in one area, they are almost universally flailing in one or more key aspects. Francis Ford Coppola’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula starred the man of a thousand faces, Gary Oldman, as the erotic, tragic, and monstrous Dracula. The film is luscious in its use of color, scenery, and music. You get to watch Anthony Hopkins go a little off his nut and Tom Waits fall straight out of the oak tree. How could you lose? Oh, that’s right, asking Winona Ryder and Keanu Reeves to do British accents. Even watching topless vampire ladies unfold out of the bed and give ol’ Keanu a nip and a BJ wasn’t enough of a distraction from the ridiculous affectation.

I took the time to ask the internet what it thought the greatest vampire movies were, and I was greeted with the likes of Underworld, Blade, Queen of the Damned, Van Helsing, and Dracula 2000. ::facepalm:: Going by the choices, the genre is dominated by action flicks, erotica (thank you Alyssa Milano), or camp. The camp can be a lot of fun (Buffy the Vampire Slayer), and a good ol’ fashioned survival or monster movie is thrilling and scary, but very few films actually dissect what it would be like to be or encounter a vampire in the real world. In this respect, Let the Right One In stands out as the new golden standard for vampire films.



It figures that the Swedish would be the ones to make a film that is, at its core, about two lonely individuals who are persecuted by society. Set in a land of silence and snow with only a few precious hours of blazing sunlight, this film is subtle if nothing else. The music doesn’t lead the viewer’s emotions or suddenly screech as a violent attack takes place. It’s haunting and beautiful, perfectly reflecting the quiet hamlet the main character inhabits. The loneliness felt by Oskar, an eleven year old boy, and his new vampire neighbor Eli is evident in the use of natural sounds: breathing, sniffles, heartbeats, the crunch of snow, quiet taps on the wall, as well as silence. This is something that isn’t done as much as it should. American filmgoers have been perfectly trained to be led by music playing through the entirety of the film, being told what to feel and how to react to what’s onscreen, instead of letting the action affect them. The silence isn’t boring; it’s poignant, and it makes the film’s impact felt that much harder.

Did I forget to tell you what the film is about? Sorry, my lady boner for this movie can sometimes be a distraction. The overall plot is simple: Young boy, bullied by school mates, ignored by divorced parents, and woefully small and frail, makes a new friend when the androgynous and mysterious girl who doesn’t feel the cold moves in next door. After some time, he realizes that her strange behavior stems from her vampiric nature. The confusion over having the first person he’s cared about turn out to be a hungry predator is understandably painful for young Oskar. However, being a small weakling with dreams of blood and revenge, he finds strength through her to stand up to the local bully. Despite how dangerous and obsessive their attraction is, they fit together because they are the only ones who understand each other. Bizarre though it is, my favorite scene besides the underwater pool scene is at the end where Oskar is traveling by train with Eli in a trunk beside him, and they tap out “Kiss” in morse code on the box.



I have to say that I was truly impressed with how the film was handled; everything was understated, subtle, and most of all, disturbing. The viewer isn’t inundated with gore and violence and fighting and explosions; instead we get soft guttural growls, short, dark, and faraway shots of Eli leaping onto her victims, and a conservative use of blood. Surprisingly, the ascetic style makes the film feel more realistic. It makes the characters flesh and blood and heartbreakingly sympathetic. The lack of explosions (save one combustible patient in the hospital) and action does slow down the pace of the film; however, (unless you are an action junkie) this doesn’t make the film slow or painfully drawn out. It’s a character study that touches on several themes and moral dilemmas, and is well-worth your time.

Interesting notes:
I checked up on Wikipedia, and this film is based on the 2004 novel Låt den rätte komma in by Sweidsh author John Ajvide Lindqvist, who also wrote the screenplay for the film. Naturally, the book goes further into the backstory of several characters and is more violent and gory. An interesting twist is that Eli is an androgynous boy who was castrated two hundred years ago. The film gives this informative tidbit a nod with a brief flash of Eli changing and we see her not-quite-normal, possibly-scarred privates.

The title refers to a bonus track on Morrissey’s Viva Hate called “Let the Right One Slip In,” as well as vampire lore that proposes that vampires cannot enter a home unless invited. It was a high point in the film when Oskar forces Eli to come into his apartment without being asked and what happens to her as a result.

In typical douchebag American fashion, English publishers changed the title to Let Me In, citing that the original title was too long. Thankfully, due to the success of the film, the original title has been restored.

Now, I know that there are some vampire movies of note that are pretty excellent. I'll address these the best I can next time, so stay tuned. Same bat time, same bat channel!