Besides obviously acting as a metaphor on multiple levels, I took Eli’s castration as a such simpler aspect of being a vampire.
A twelve year old boy, being immortal and ageless, has no need for male genitalia. Such things serve no purpose. Now, take that immortal pre-pubescent boy, and make him a girl to the outside world, and you’ve got something with power. The power to seduce, the power to trick, the power to control.
The way I looked at it, in this alternate reality of the film in which vampires exist, all males turned over before a certain age are probably castrated. It better serves themselves, and it better serves the vampire community as a whole.
Brandon – Interesting theory – a whole reversal of the original vampire concept of the male being the “ultimate seducer of the weak and vulnerable female.” A role reversal so to speak. I also still lean toward Eli’s castration serving as some sort of metaphor for Oskar’s own feminine characteristics and his own “emasculation” by his peers, hence the “Eli as alter ego” concept. Don’t mean to be pushing this theory too much here in the forum, but the more I ponder it, the more I seem to think it may be so. But this is just one man’s opinion.
Brandon, definitely an interesting theory!
Lester-I’m not sure about Oskar having feminine characteristics. He’s kind of androgynous but a lot of 12 years are.
Steve, I think its fair to say that Oskar is “emasculated” in contrast to say…his bullies of same age.
That’s a very interesting theory, Brandon. That makes me want to watch it again.
Still, the CGI cats and flames…. come on.
BRITTAN – I didn’t think the woman catching fire in the hospital was over the top at all, on the contrary, just a brief nod to vampire lore. The big question is: Are these nods to traditional vampire lore, in the vein of contemporary vampire films, still a necessary evil, or can traditional vampire lore be completely phased out because, culturally speaking, we are all quite familiar with this folklore already? The burning woman’s plight, imo, was briefly played out, and if the director deemed such a scene necessary, at least it was done in an original setting, and not some boarded-up home with all the windows shuttered. Which brings to mind another scene, the one that reveals Eli’s sleeping quarters – a bathtub sealed off from light by stacks of blankets and a sheet of cardboard. But again, are these scenarios still necessary? For vampire films, I believe they are, even if they’re played out briefly, which in the case of this film, I think they were, and most effectively for that matter.
Ok, has anyone noticed that the Magnolia DVD release changed the subtitles from the theatrical release. It’s incredibly distracting as I saw it more than once in theatres. Why would they do that?
I tend to agree with the theories put forward here that Eli’s mission from the beginning is to replace her ‘Renfield’ with Oskar and that this routine has become a necessary if somewhat unpleasant task in Eli’s life. If you’ll recall, her provider isn’t a very successful one having failed to obtain for Eli the blood that he needs to survive and that this has probably been going on for some time thereby placing Eli at risk by having to venture out to provide for himself. This theory makes Eli the ultimate villain and the movie far more interesting especially in regards to Eli’s relationship to Oskar and the motivations behind it. As far as Eli being male, well, if you needed a strong male to go out and hunt for you, who could better seduce that male into providing that service, a twelve year old boy, or an attractive twelve year old girl? Eli has been castrated to improve his chances of survival. This is all my opinion of course since I have not read the book.
Howdy folks, I posted this over at the HTF, and I thought you all might enjoy as well.
There are in my opinion several clues to suggest that Eli’s relationship with Oskar is much, much different than with Hakan.
From the first time we really see Hakan and Eli interact with one another as they’re being dropped off by the taxi cab, we are aware that Eli is the dominant party in the relationship. Eli walks into the apartment building straight away leaving Hakan to struggle with their things. This is of course more apparent during the scene where we hear Eli berating Hakan for botching the murder. Eli is a thousand times more powerful and terrifying than Hakan will ever be, and the only thing that Hakan can do is capitulate and beg forgiveness. Another good example is the scene where she tells Hakan that he might not want to go out, and she very mechanically touches his cheek. Hakan sinks into himself for a moment, relishing the physical affection, but it’s clear that Eli feels nothing and is performing this act precisely because she knows what it’ll do to Hakan. It’s also possible at this point in the story that Eli is willfully putting Hakan at risk, with full knowledge of what he’ll do if he’s caught. Manipulative, mechanical actions toward Hakan can also be seen in the hospital scene, there’s even a hint of what might be contempt for Hakan after we see him fall out of the window. This might’ve been the plan all along. It’s interesting to note the role-reversal here regarding pedophilia…it’s the adult who grooms the child, not the other way ’round as it is here. Eli is a manipulative monster and I believe she has had to learn to become that to avoid emotional pain.
On the contrary, we see her interactions with Oskar and witness Eli making herself vulnerable many times. There are also instances of Eli initating physical affection towards Oskar, and she displays actual emotion.
However, the scene that made me believe there is an element of codependency between Oskar and Eli is the scene where we hear Eli telling Oskar he needs to stand up for himself. It’s possible that Eli sees Oskar as a “project”, and is drawn to him because he has always been a victim. She is obviously a predator in the animal sense, but may also be a predator in the psychological sense. (as a side note, it’s interesting to me to think about which came first…was Eli naturally this way and it’s a fit with her vampire side, or has the wiring in her brain adapted to being a predator?)
Oskar readily accepts these roles. I don’t believe Oskar knows how or wants to be the dominant party in any relationship.
There are also a couple of instances where Eli has to control her most base instinctual urges regarding Oskar: The cellar scene of course, and another most people might miss. There is a scene after Hakan has not returned with the second boy’s blood and Eli is doubled over in pain facing Oskar’s wall. She raises her hand to tap on the wall, but hesitates and ultimately does not. She might’ve been thinking about Oskar as a potential meal. We see her later still idly tapping on the wall when she hears the radio report about Hakan and makes the decision to visit him.
There’s also of course the pool scene…she knows she has to go away, but willingly potentially sacrifices herself for Oskar’s life. She uses the part of herself that she hates, and is embarrassed by, to save Oskar. She makes herself vulnerable to herself here, too.
Thanks for the great discussions everyone.
Very nice analysis Josh. I tend to think that everyone has a different side to them in different situations with different people. We see two sides to Eli’s character in her/his relationships with Hakan and Oskar – the survivalist predator doing what is neccessary to survive, as we see in her relationship with Hakan, and then we see her/his more vulnerable, human side in her/his relationship with Oskar, a side that possibly existed long, long ago, a side in which she still longs to involver herself/hisself in in the neverending cycle of mortal relationships. Your analysis underscores all this, or vice versa, and least in my opinion.
Finally saw it; one on the most interentings reinventions of the vampire genere since Del Toro´s Cronos.
Preciscely, the interaction between Eli and Hakan, and then Oskar taking his place, in some quirky way remembered me of The Hunger.
I think maybe I need to make my opinion clearer: I do NOT believe that Eli was grooming Oskar to be a replacement for Hakan.
Eli made the decision to return to Oskar’s life after having left. She could have easily steeled herself to be as emotionally numb as she’s had to be countless times before. She didn’t. She fell for Oskar and Oskar fell for her.
I think that Eli had found someone who she could understand in a way she couldn’t other people. If Eli were a sociopath, as I believe she is, Oskar may be the first person that exists emotionally to her. I’d wager it’d be difficult to conceive of emotion in people who A)Do not understand you and will not accept you, B)You do not understand because you exist in shadow and apart from them, and finally C)You have to use as food.
If Eli treated Oskar this way and thought of Oskar this way she simply would not have made herself as vulnerable as she did. There would be no point. The “coming in uninvited” scene actually has Eli willingly commiting suicide for Oskar. There would not have been a way out of that situation had she not trusted Oskar enough and wanted to illustrate that she’d made herself vulnerable for him. In Oskar, Eli found someone like herself and could have real sympathy for her situation.
In the book (I know the book is not the film, but this is important…) Eli very matter-of-factly TELLS Hakan how it’s going to be, and Hakan complies. Between Oskar and Eli there is actual interaction, a back and forth — both concerning the initation of physical affection and the exchange of power. Eli is simply always in charge of Hakan. She manipulates him and does not care about him. He is a potentially useful tool, nothing more.
On a completely different note, I think another major theme in this movie is the entire idea of gender identity as it relates to the whole concept of romantic love. I think this is one of the sweetest, purest love stories I’ve ever seen on film. Both have basically no gender identity (at the moment at least for Oskar, and he may never actually develop a gender identity because of his relationship with Eli), and their relationship is based solely on a very fundamental understanding of another human being, wholly untangled from the weeds of sexuality. “Then we’re together.” This is said only after Eli verifies just what Oskar is after, and is OK with it. This is the warm little campfire in the middle of all the cold and dark of this movie.
One last thing (OK maybe not): This film’s use of sound is PHENOMENAL. Not only are the sounds made punctuate by the silence they exist in, but very specific ones are chosen to evoke other senses and sense memory in the viewer. Just a quick couple of examples: The sound of the snow crunching under Oskar and Eli’s feet (who doesn’t hear that and immediately get ten other sensations associated with that? All of a sudden you’re cold, the bottoms of your pant legs are wet, the back of your neck is chilled, etc etc) and the sound of the boy Hakan killed’s blood as it dribbles sickly into the container. The sound used for that lets you instantly get a feel for the plastic jug, the viscosity of the blood, etc.
Another thing that pleases me immensely about this picture is Oskar’s line about how Eli smells bad. You just don’t get that in most movies. You don’t get to know what characters smell like. Not only is it used as a device later to show that Eli wants to please Oskar, but it’s used to add yet another dimension of reality to the illusion of the movie.
Josh, I think that you would make the perfect victim for a cute vampire. My point is, and this is just my personal interpretation, is that Eli most likely cared for Hakan in the same way as Oskar when she met Hakan as a boy (Eli is forever twelve for a reason and I’m assuming she met Hakan as a young boy). Hakan was truly in love with and completely devoted to Eli just as Oskar now appears to be. She now tells Hakan ‘how it’s going to be’ because he has served his purpose poorly and needs to be replaced. Her seduction of Oskar is simply her method of finding another one who will be loyal and devoted to her just as Hakan had been. She’s a seductress for a reason, ultimately for her very survival. Remember, she has the appearance of a twelve year old but she is actually over two hundred years old if I remember correctly. She’s much wiser than she lets on. So the question for me is; is this a brilliant ploy by a clever two hundred year old vampire in the ways of survival, or does Eli truly have feelings for Oskar as a friend or possible mate? Do vampires even mate? I think Eli is more sinister than what we are shown on the surface. And that, for me, makes her much more interesting.
For those against the remake…. Reeves’ script is wonderful. Everyone I know who hasn’t seen the original finds this to be a fantastic script that will stand well enough on its own. It’s a very interesting take on the story you’re dutifully defending but there’s nothing to be afraid of… you’ll now have two great movies (or 1 great and 1 good).
Matty — where can one find the script?
Soybean, I agree that Eli is a 200+ year old manipulative seductress ultimately for her survival. However, I’m with Josh that Eli is not that way with Oskar. I think for the first time Eli sees in Oskar someone he cannot kill or manipulate (nor does he want to) because he actually has an emotional attachment to him. Even more so, Oskar is much like him. In the beginning of the movie, Oskar and Eli don’t want to be friends with each other. They have both accepted the fact from their separate experiences that they’re on their own. But they eventually find common interests (puzzles and morse code) and form a bond of friendship and eventually even more than that. My favorite scenes are when Oskar for the first time is in Eli’s apartment and Eli goes to see Oskar in his (the scene where he doesn’t invite her in). They show a parallel how both Eli and Oskar make victims and companions of themselves.I say victims because neither give each other any room to maneuver. They both open the door, but neither is really invited in until they get what they want (i.e. Eli keeps the glass door between himself and Oskar until he sees that being a vampire doesn’t bother Oskar and Oskar refuses to invite Eli in forcing him to walk in on his own). I say companions because it is not until they believe one truly cares about the other that they’re allowed in. So Soybean I agree that Eli is more sinister than what we are shown on the surface. But so is Oskar. That to me is why their relationship works so well. Laughing to self Let the Right One in…indeed.
This was my favorite film of 2008. I saw it in Portland, OR last November and just recently in Dayton, OH in the theatre. Just as good the second time around.
This is one of my favorite films this year, if not this decade. What an amazing take on the vampire film. The cinematography was breathtaking. So melancholic, and such good performances and direction.
I’m new here – came looking online for intelligent discussion of this amazing film.
Two things:
1. Who was shouting at Hakan in the early scene? “You’re supposed to be helping me!”. I assume this was Eli? At the time I assumed it was a third person.
2. One thing that hasn’t really been discussed so much is the Jocke / Lacke / Ginia plot. It was important because it gives dramatic weight to the Eli and Oskar story – for example in the scene where Oskar saves Eli in the bathtub, that wouldn’t work unless we’d already seen Ginia combust.
But…I want to find some more significance in it I guess, or some kind of reflection of the Oskar / Eli story; any of you got any thoughts about it?
This film has just been released in Australia. Two questions-
Is it worth paying money more for?
And what should I expect if I do see it?
Please be objective!!
I’ve just saw it. Loved it.
Simple observation. Oskar is emasculated, in the fact that Eli rescues him from the bullies.
Also, that globe. Eli says to Oskar, (paraphrasing) “If you sell it, you can buy a nuclear plant.” Oskar touches and it breaks like a 3D jigsaw. What is it supposed to mean?
>Eli is more sinister than what we are shown on the surface. But so is Oskar.
When Lionel Dahmer, father of Jeffrey-the-infamous-serial-cannibal, made the media rounds doing TV interviews about his son, it put viewers in mind of the fact that this man came from somewhere, that he had a childhood…And watching this film, I had the persistent idea that Oskar is the very picture of that child, stained with bloody thoughts only yet in his mind (that is, until he breaks the bully’s nose). Some of the outward traits of the compulsive killer – morbid curiosity and the news article scrapbook, the knife, the burgeoning blood-fetish – are already evident in Oskar…
Very much the genesis of any serial killer. What better premise to set a vampire tale to – a potential serial killer finding a kindred spirit in a vampire?
I was going to come onto this thread with my genius deduction that Oskar is being groomed by Eli to become another Hakan, and here Soybean beat me to it. If you look at how Hakan regards Oskar as a threat, knowing full well that that is how Eli acts to get someone close to her. Not as a malicious design on them, but simply how we all have different sides to our personality.
As for the Oskar and Eli being the same person… Well, I don’t agree with that at all. I think that’s a pretty shallow ‘Fight Club’ reading of a much more complex relationship.
Actually Brittan made that argument before my post and I was trying to reinforce that argument. It is how I interpreted the film as well.
Yeah, well, these things happen.
I finally watched this for the first time last night, so I was able to read this thread, which I’d been curious about. It is a very lyrical film, that works as a very scary horror film and as an extremely tender coming of age/love story. That amazed me, because it’s sort of equal parts. It’s like a love relationship with blood and violence and murder — that’s why Oskar and Eli have each found “the right one.” It’s a very tactile film — dripping blood, bare feet on snow. I like the idea of a vampire film in snow, I love snow in movies, not so much in real life. The opening shots remind me of the beginning of Persona. Oskar’s parents sort of hover in the margins of near invisibility — even when you think the mother, for instance, will become overbearing, she just sort of slips away. Eli’s “father” is really her Renfield — his bumblings are almost funny. The movie masterfully controls mood, just when you think one sort of thing will happen, something else does that’s usually equally or more shocking. Many shocking things occur, but always juxtaposed by things that are subdued and even banal.
I understand the relation between Hakan and Eli better since reading these posts. He has aged over time because he’s not a vampire; whereas she has stayed the same age when she was bitten (12 or so). Clearly he was 12 when Eli first met him. He senses that he’s about to be replaced when he jealously asks Eli not to see Oskar and she caresses his face. Oskar will have his time with her I guess, until he ages beyond usefulness. Or perhaps… she will treat him better. Eternity is a long time to never know true love.
Nice observations Justin. The things you point out are among the many things I find that make this film so captivating – a horror film both subtle and though-provoking. It seems to capture that tender melancholy that is adolescence so well. I came across a review by a blogger named Tim Lucas, who I thought penned some interesting observations as well, i.e how the “strangeness immediately evident in Oskar’s and Eli’s relationship has a supernatural cause and the film, rather than becoming a pure exercise in horror and shock and revulsion, becomes a tragic essay on the theme of amour fou, and how love can make even monsters sympathetic and their most horrible traits forgivable.”
I think this one will definitely withstand the test of time.
Crap Monster
Brittan indeed! the pool scene was pretty darn awesome.