by Mike Pickle, MoreHorror.com

I had mixed feelings about even watching Let Me In. After seeing it, I still do. Sure, director Matt Reeves (Cloverfield) is an excellent director. There's no doubt about that. The team that they put together is nothing short of astounding. Chloe Moretz (Kick-Ass) as the young vampire Abby. Kodi Smit-McPhee (The Road) as the morbid little misfit, Owen. Incredibly accomplished actor Richard Jenkins as Abby's troubled guardian and, (one of my personal favorites) the great Elias Koteas as the prying policeman who threatens to shatter the children's ghoulish fairy-tale world. All signs pointed to this being a wonderful film and, in a lot of ways, it was.

There are plenty of things to like about it, but I'm not sure if it should even be there. I wouldn't, normally, directly compare a remake to the original in one of my reviews, but for a film to be made two short years after the original it is begging for a comparison. For this reason; I felt that I should critique both films in the same review in order to illustrate what worked for each film and what was improved upon in the remake. Yes, the original was improved upon in some very small aspects, but it does not mean it should have been remade. The premise of both films are the same. A lonely and bullied young boy finds friendship and strength when he meets an enigmatic little girl who has moved in next door to him with her guardian. A girl who just so happens to be a vampire.

Tomas Alfredson superbly directed the Swedish film just released in 2008 based on the novel written by Ajvide Lindqvist who also adapted the screenplay. He was originally asked to do the American remake, but turned it down stating that, "Remakes should be made of movies that aren't very good. That gives you the chance to fix whatever has gone wrong. I'm very proud of my movie and I think it's great, but the Americans might have another opinion. The saddest thing for me would be to see this beautiful story made into something mainstream. I don't like to whine, but of course - if you spent years on painting a picture, you'd hate to hear buzz about a copy even before your vernissage" (vermissage meaning the start of an art exhibit). I couldn't agree more.

I must say, it's an impressive remake, but the original is still fresh. I can't help but think that, no matter how good it is, it has still tarnished the legacy of the original. Just in case you still have yet to see either film; I'll try not to give too much away while illustrating specific comparisons.

The first touch that was added to Let Me In was the time honored tradition of beginning the film in the middle of the story. A teaser used to grab the attention of viewers with short attention spans and assure them that excitement lies ahead before going back to the beginning. The original was much more patient crafting a linear story using beautiful cinematography, a haunting score and a clever and emotional script to keep the film interesting.

That being said; the teaser was still effective and made for a nice introduction to the policeman played by Elias Koteas. A character that wasn't in the original. This character was an improvement for me because the time spent on him didn't allow for the appearance of Owen's father. This added to Owen's isolation and despair and worked well for the story.

One thing that many feel was an improvement was the decidedly more graphic nature of the remake. Not so, in my opinion. First of all; it's more graphic because this one had almost five times the budget of the original. A budget that was used for added realism as well as CGI vampire attacks that only served to cheapen them. These scenes are more likely to make you say, "Ooh, that looks cool" rather than "Oh shit that's scary" like the original. For a story with this much emotion and depth; less is more. The depth wasn't entirely non-existent in the remake thanks to great acting, but the CGI certainly takes you out of the story.

The bigger budget was put to good use in, hands down, the most impressive scene of Let Me In. The car crash. A seamless magic trick of a scene that you have to see to believe. I won't give away details because this particular scene played out much differently than the original and is worth the price of admission. Although, I didn't feel good about it being in there. It was a great scene of movie magic that was wasted on a remake.

It's also simply not fair to take a much bigger budget and craft an expensive scene as bold and visionary as this one to try to show up the original indie gem. If more of the scenes were as originally conceived as this one it would have stood on it's own and been a much more respectable film overall, but in the context of the this film where many scenes were duplicated, it stuck out like a sore thumb.

Two key scenes in particular were duplicated which is a big mistake for a remake no matter how much money you throw at it. The more money you throw at it, the cheaper it looks. Duplicating scenes from the original can only serve to remind us that originals are almost always better. The first scene in question is when Owen refuses to invite Abby into his home and insists that she try to come in anyway.

First of all; the lead in to this moment is much more convincing in the original and we better understand why Owen is acting this way. The scene is imitated almost shot for shot and feels like a cheap knock-off. The same goes for the other scene in question: The pool massacre scene. It was also an imitation of the original and simply did not work as well. It looked too similar and, upon comparison, clearly did not hold up. I must say, the lead in to this scene was more exciting though. Mostly because of the exquisite casting of Dylan Minnette as the bully. This blue-eyed little monster made me hate him and Dylan provided a better arc and depth to the character that was lacking in the original.

Don't get me wrong. Both are great films. The original is just better. I wish this director would have been given the same money and same cast to film an original work. This isn't as much of a bankable concept for the studio, but I would be willing to bet that with this caliber of talent; it would have found an audience.

Let Me In didn't do great at the box office so it wasn't as bankable as the studio would have like it to be, I'm sure. It's a shame because almost everything was great about this film. Except the fact that it had to live up to a work of art that was created so recently. Let Me In is an extremely well done remake, but one that came too soon.

Let The Right One In Trailer:

Let Me In Trailer: