The Movie...Let the Right One In
SPOILERS GALORE….Only Continue Reading if You’ve Already Enjoyed the Film!! The movie’s great and if you’re a fan of foreign, horror, coming of age, or vampires, I suggest you check it out.
But what bothered me was the unstated, though very present, undercurrents of sexuality related to a 12-year-old vampire. There is a shot in the film that shows a close up of Eli’s frontal, unpantied body. NUDITY IN A 12-YEAR-OLD GIRL? REALLY? Is that ever appropriate, except if we’re catering to degenerates? Though I didn’t recognize it as such, one of my NFriends thought the shot shows a scar. Twice during the film, Eli says that she is not a girl and her comments might be referring to the fact that she’s dead. But is that true?
We know Eli is old, surely too old to have gone through any type of surgery while she was alive for a sex change or intersexual condition. But if it is indeed a scar, that’s where the package would have been. ALSO THERE’S THE ISSUE OF HER “FATHER,” who can’t possibly be, because he isn’t old enough. So, was he selected when he too was 11 years old? As a grown man, are we to assume that their relationship is platonic or paternal? If Oskar is the chosen “father” replacement, will she become his girlfriend as he grows older? Though her body is 12, this girl has been around for a while and I think there is another aspect to this story that is only hinted at.
Ok, the sexual parts of this speculation are icky, but as many people have already mentioned, this is a dark story and I’m interested in what the filmmakers were striving for…because I don’t believe a story of this nature (12-year-old-vicious-monster-when-she-needs-to-be) would not dare to tread on such slippery, possibly tabooed, slopes. Or maybe I’m the degenerate, seeing sexual situations where none exist. Even if it’s to tell me I’m full of crap, what do YOU think?
But what bothered me was the unstated, though very present, undercurrents of sexuality related to a 12-year-old vampire. There is a shot in the film that shows a close up of Eli’s frontal, unpantied body. NUDITY IN A 12-YEAR-OLD GIRL? REALLY? Is that ever appropriate, except if we’re catering to degenerates? Though I didn’t recognize it as such, one of my NFriends thought the shot shows a scar. Twice during the film, Eli says that she is not a girl and her comments might be referring to the fact that she’s dead. But is that true?
We know Eli is old, surely too old to have gone through any type of surgery while she was alive for a sex change or intersexual condition. But if it is indeed a scar, that’s where the package would have been. ALSO THERE’S THE ISSUE OF HER “FATHER,” who can’t possibly be, because he isn’t old enough. So, was he selected when he too was 11 years old? As a grown man, are we to assume that their relationship is platonic or paternal? If Oskar is the chosen “father” replacement, will she become his girlfriend as he grows older? Though her body is 12, this girl has been around for a while and I think there is another aspect to this story that is only hinted at.
Ok, the sexual parts of this speculation are icky, but as many people have already mentioned, this is a dark story and I’m interested in what the filmmakers were striving for…because I don’t believe a story of this nature (12-year-old-vicious-monster-when-she-needs-to-be) would not dare to tread on such slippery, possibly tabooed, slopes. Or maybe I’m the degenerate, seeing sexual situations where none exist. Even if it’s to tell me I’m full of crap, what do YOU think?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Pihk on -
sex sex sex sex sex
Please be quiet, Mr Penis, I am trying to watch a movie.
sex sex sex sex sex
I am asking you once again to refrain from speaking while I am watching this movie.
sex sex sex sex sex
Look, I must say that it is rather rude of you to persist in distracting me in the middle of this movie. Now I am asking you once again to quit it.
sex sex sex sex sex
ALRIGHT YOU BASTARD! I'VE HAD ENOUGH!!! DO YOU WANT ME TO SPANK YOU FOR BEING NAUGHTY??? IF YOU DON'T SHADDUP I WILL CHOKE YOU LIKE I DID BEFORE!!! SHADDUP SHADDUP SHADDUP!!!
(c) 2009 Pihk Satire Corp.
-
Permalink Reply by Freakin Meow on -
LOL!!
-
Permalink Reply by Phatz on -
Donna,
Interesting observations. I never found any of it inappropriate personally. I have always found Vampirism to be extremely sexually charged in nature. I mean it is the drinking of others bodily fluids right. and Bloodlust is this uncontrollable urge so there is a sexual tension I think In all Vampire films. And I never felt this crossed a line. it is not exploitative in anyway. The actress may even have been covered with a prosthetic but it was so brief in passing it never stood out as anything more than curious kids to me. I would need to go back and check (if so inclined) to see about the scar but if there was a point trying to be made it would have need to be made more clearly so, I don't think she had a sex change. That comment about "not a girl" I definitely interpreted that to mean that she is not human. In other words she is dead and cannot be his lover, only his friend. that is how I took it, but I have not read the book so ...
Also, the father figure never really seemed to her actual father to me but certainly a man who looked after her, who loved her and who fit role of father. I would find it safe to say whether he was or not he did exemplify a fatherly love for her. Up to the point of putting her needs ahead of his own.
I am actually curious to read the book now. I read very few but I'll get it recorded. I was not surprised some people were let down with all the hype. The same is going to happen with Slumdog Millionaire but both were really exceptional films in my opinion. =)
Cheers my Friend!
-Matt
-
Permalink Reply by thatboy on -
Good grief, Mark, your arguments are all over the place. All sorts of scattershot postulations spread over a number of posts that loop around each other in a confusing array. I apologize to all for the length of this, but shortened it as much as I could. Where to begin?
In a wider context than a film discussion forum, you make a valid point.
Well, thanks, but I wasn’t talking about a wider context. I am talking specifically about nude children in art.
I am convinced that the depictions of children in this movie were intended to be shocking. Presenting a naked child for shock value is provocative by definition
Your conviction aside, I wasn’t shocked or provoked in the least. I didn’t even think about it until I read this discussion.
I am still somewhat leery of even simulated nudity of children, on the grounds that it might be a trigger for pedophiles.
Yes, I am sure pedophiles are lining up to see the one-second shot of a scarred vampire in LTROI. Pedophiles don’t need a ’trigger.’ A normal adult is not going to see a naked child and suddenly become a pedophile. They won’t see LTROI and say, “Hey, I didn’t realize I was a pedophile, but I’d like to hit that!”
I am not offended by pictures of naked children in textbooks on pediatric medicine, for example. Admittedly, there are circumstances under which pictures of naked children might facilitate essential medical treatment or serve some other useful purpose.
Three cheers for the Age of Enlightenment.
My chief concern was that the dignity of a young girl had been needlessly compromised… Crazy or not, clothing is an essential component of human dignity.
Really? Who says being naked automatically strips away ‘human dignity?’ You’re making a blanket statement that confuses forced nudity with willing nudity. There are numerous situations in which people can be naked and maintain ‘dignity.’
An adolescent girl can be painfully self-conscious in a middle-school locker-room… a boy of fifteen would most likely howl if his mother entered the bathroom while he showered… Any report of strip-searching, at an airport, for example, is invariably met with widespread indignation... Involuntary nudity was universally recognized as one of the abuses against prisoners at Abu Ghraib Prison.
All true. None of which apply to the (now hypothetical) situation at hand. Sure, nudity combined with a fearful setting, degradation, and torture are all alarming. What we’re talking about is nudity in a safe environment with consent and parental supervision. Very different.
And while some adolescents may be self-conscious about nudity, others may not. Or they might feel awkward naked in some situations and not others. As a personal example, I hated showering in gym, would’ve died if my mom saw me naked at home, wouldn’t go skinny-dipping with friends, etc. I did, however, appear naked on stage a number of times, starting at age 16, in front of thousands of strangers. That didn’t bother me in the least, even if those same friends and relatives I wouldn’t let see me naked in day-to-day life were in the audience. Why? Because, it was my work. I was playing a character and it was the character that was naked, not me. You may choose to believe adolescents can’t make that distinction, but it simply isn’t true.
I seriously doubt that a girl of twelve would be happy about going naked in front of a film crew.
See above. Your doubting it doesn’t make it so. It would depend on the situation and if the child was raised to be ashamed of their body. There is also a difference between ‘happy’ and comfortable.
You might claim that there is no harm if the girl was truly willing but there is no way to be sure.
There are plenty of ways a parent can talk to their offspring about whether they would be comfortable appearing nude without coercing them. A good parent knows how to listen to what a child is saying.
The image of a fully clothed, adult director cajoling a child to get undressed is repugnant to me.
Oh, that is repugnant. The big, bad man leering as the softly weeping child disrobes! That’s a fictional scenario in your head, however, not an actual instance you’re referring to.
First you say:
However, I will grant that vigilance can protect children from predators without recourse to the slippery slope of censorship…
Then, later:
any distribution of nude photographs is an assault on the dignity of that child and should be condemned… A strict moratorium on child nudity is the only safe course… To me this is sufficient justification for censure.
Rather contradictory. So, which is it?
Couch it any way you like, but the bottom line is that you are in favor of censorship regardless of any merit the work may have or circumstances outside of your dramatic fictional scenarios.
The fact is, many children have appeared nude in works of art without being scarred by it and without being targeted by pedophiles. The young subjects who posed naked for Mapplethorpe and Sturges, now adults, have praised their work. The kids who appeared naked in John Water’s Desperate Living have attended screenings as adults to talk with audiences and sign autographs for fans.
If you can’t differentiate between showing a naked child and child exploitation or child pornography, the problem lies with you, not the work of art.
-
Permalink Reply by Microwaved on -
I’d like to hit that!”
Quit using my words to undress me! Jeez, I guy has a couple of days off and look what happens.
-
Permalink Reply by Mark Zajac on -
More than one person has expressed some dissatisfaction with my fragmented posting. I knew that my views might seem preachy and felt that one big post might seem even more like a sermon. Rather than hogging the floor, I had hoped that multiple short posts would invite people to jump in with opinions, wherever they wished. My intent was that people could "get a word in edgewise" as the saying goes. Instead, I gave you the burden of consolidating my views, in order to quote them, in your rebuttal. I regret any barrier to civil discourse that has resulted from my posting strategy.
You wrote: "Pedophiles don’t need a ’trigger.’"
It is my understanding that, upon release, convicted pedophiles are required to avoid play-grounds and other places where children gather, in order to avoid temptation. I am quite sure that I read that somewhere. It seems possible that pedophiles might gravitate to an "R" rated movie with a trailer that features children. My claim is weakened by lack of a reference. If you'd care to suggest something, I will read it. I would like to be better informed.
You wrote: "I'll tell you what is an abomination: An adult who can't see a naked child without thinking about sex."
At the risk of extrapolation, this seemed to imply that I see any picture of a naked child in a sexual context and that I am consequently abominable. My reference to medical text books was an attempt to concede that some images of naked children can be perfectly innocuous. Perhaps my example was too extreme to be constructive. I am sorry for any misunderstanding on this point.
You wrote: "Children have bodies. Children are sometimes naked."
This is absolutely true but does not imply that a child will be comfortable with going naked. Children at home in a tub, is one thing. Children exposed to the entire crew on a film set is another.
As you noted, it is also true that nudity alone does not constitute an automatic forfeiture of dignity. My sole objective in giving some examples was to establish that nudity might cause a child, or any person, extreme discomfort. Nudity is listed as an unacceptable interrogation technique in the Army Field Manual for Human Intelligence Collector Operations (FM-2-22-3). On this basis, nudity should not be taken lightly. It is imperative to proceed with utmost caution, where children are concerned. That is my point.
You wrote: "There are plenty of ways a parent can talk to their offspring about whether they would be comfortable appearing nude without coercing them."
My example of a director cajoling a child to go naked is admittedly a worst case scenario. In my very next sentence, I acknowledged that the child might actually be willing. However, society recognizes that children are suggestible and complaisant. Children are not equipped to make informed decisions on weighty issues. Children are not allowed to vote. Children are not allowed to marry. In court, the testimony of children is subject to intense scrutiny and usually regarded as suspect. Securing the willing participation of a child is not an adequate safeguard against abuse. You can't determine what is best for a child by simply asking the child. Limitless candy might result (a small joke). You mentioned that a "good parent" knows how to listen but not all children have good parents. An unscrupulous director and an ambitious "stage mother" might collude with disastrous consequences. You gave examples of children who survived nudity unscathed. Great! Still, a strategy for protecting innocent children must address the worst case scenario.
You wrote: "Rather contradictory so which is it?"
I am leery of simulated nudity as a possible trigger for pedophiles but concede that vigilance affords children adequate protection, without recourse to censorship. However, photographs that show the actual nudity of a child should not be allowed to circulate. My views are certainly dogmatic but not contradictory, as you suggested. I am guilty, however, of failing emphasise my distinction between simulated and actual nudity. The blame for any misunderstanding falls to me.
If you have any final thoughts, I promise to read them and reflect upon them. I regret that I have no more time for additional rebuttal, perhaps to your vast relief.
[:-)] Mark
-
Permalink Reply by Headcheese on -
And while some adolescents may be self-conscious about nudity, others may not. Or they might feel awkward naked in some situations and not others. As a personal example, I hated showering in gym, would’ve died if my mom saw me naked at home, wouldn’t go skinny-dipping with friends, etc. I did, however, appear naked on stage a number of times, starting at age 16, in front of thousands of strangers. That didn’t bother me in the least, even if those same friends and relatives I wouldn’t let see me naked in day-to-day life were in the audience. Why? Because, it was my work. I was playing a character and it was the character that was naked, not me. You may choose to believe adolescents can’t make that distinction, but it simply isn’t true.
Got pictures????
-
Permalink Reply by Pihk on
-
Any report of strip-searching, at an airport, for example, is invariably met with widespread indignation, even in the face of grave security concerns. Involuntary nudity was universally recognized as one of the abuses against prisoners at Abu Ghraib Prison. Asking a child to go naked for a film is asking that child to relinquish a basic human right and for a frivolous reason, no less.
Do you know what else has been recognized as abuses @ Abu Ghraib, Mark? How about involuntary MURDER? Beatings. Starvation. Electrodes to the genitals. Sleep deprivation. Weeks on end spent in total isolation. Etc.
To even try to compare Abu Ghraib to the other instances you cite or some brief fake nudity in this movie is intellectual vacuousness of the most extreme kind.
About
Badge
Ning Stats...
© 2010 Created by droidmaker on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
