MovieChat Forums > Let Me In (2010) Discussion > Sex, gender, and vampires (spoiler in fi...

Sex, gender, and vampires (spoiler in first line.)

posted 9 years ago by nerowolfgal
16 replies | jump to latest

I gather that in the book the vampire turns out to be a 12 year old castrated boy, thus all the statements "I am not a girl". In this movie that plot point is totally thrown away, and yet I think it would have added another very interesting layer to the portrait of the vampire.

I think the reason for the original author of the story to add that was to underline the idea vampires HAVE no sex/gender. They become physically neutered, with all their desires and physical pleasure switched to blood-drinking, no matter what human gender they were.

And almost more than that, they become sexless beings in regard to humans. Perhaps the only use the vampire can have for a human is food, or perhaps, companionship to help with the unending loneliness

To illustrate, for me no matter how hungry I am for a steak, I still feel no physical, sexual attraction to the cow. However if I were stranded on a deserted island I might adopt the cow as a sort of pet.

This is just a passing thought, I hope it makes sense. I am now going to take my head-cold and go to bed.

Extremism is the first choice of the uninformed. Benjamin Whichcote

[–] HarpoSpoke 9 years ago

I gather that in the book the vampire turns out to be a 12 year old castrated boy, thus all the statements "I am not a girl". In this movie that plot point is totally thrown away, and yet I think it would have added another very interesting layer to the portrait of the vampire.

Might be worth noting that the director of LMI made sure to not do anything which would completely rule out the book version even though he considers Abby to be female. Here is what he had to say about that:

GS: The sexual ambiguity of Chloe’s character…

MR: The fact that she’s really a boy?

GS: Yeah. Was that removed just to simplify the story?

MR: It was, because even though it’s a beautiful aspect of the book, and you get the painful and horrific moment as Eli is castrated… the point of the film is empathy, and in the book she tells Oskar that she is some kind of freak, and she wants to see his reaction. They kiss, and suddenly Oskar sees the pain that she feels. That creates such empathy and he can forgive everything that Eli is and does. But without being able to delve into that level of detail, I thought it would be distracting to the coming of age love story. You have to be able to understand them in an intimate way, and see them from their point of view. I didn’t know how to present this part of the book in a way that wouldn’t be distancing for the audience. When I watched the Swedish version of the film, I hadn’t read the book yet, so when Eli reveals the scars on her genitalia, I had no idea what I was seeing. There’s no context. Seeing the film cold, without any background, I interprets that moment as a coming of age moment where he was fascinated by her genitalia. I didn’t know it was a bigger revelation that would only make sense to someone who had read the book. That was a conscious choice. In “Let Me In”, if you know the back story, you can still interpret it in that way, but you do not have to.

http://framingbusiness.net/archives/1284

I think the reason for the original author of the story to add that was to underline the idea vampires HAVE no sex/gender. They become physically neutered, with all their desires and physical pleasure switched to blood-drinking, no matter what human gender they were.

And almost more than that, they become sexless beings in regard to humans. Perhaps the only use the vampire can have for a human is food, or perhaps, companionship to help with the unending loneliness

The common thought on the novel is that he wanted to show there could be love with no sexual baggage. I'm not sure that works from a biological standpoint...at least with romantic love.

I do see Abby as a being who gets very lonely and desires companionship. She has twice been attracted to boys who could be of no practical use to her (Thomas and Owen)...the only thing they could offer is companionship. Her situation is tragic to me in that sense.

[–] Jameron 9 years ago

"I gather that in the book the vampire turns out to be a 12 year old castrated boy, thus all the statements "I am not a girl". In this movie that plot point is totally thrown away, and yet I think it would have added another very interesting layer to the portrait of the vampire." - nerowolfgal

The thing is, Let Me In is not about the Vampire, it's about Owen. Adding layers to Abby would possibly make her more the focus of the film than the intended focus. Plus, to do the plot point justice would add too much time to the film, time they didn't have.

"I think the reason for the original author of the story to add [I'm not a girl] was to underline the idea vampires HAVE no sex/gender. They become physically neutered, with all their desires and physical pleasure switched to blood-drinking, no matter what human gender they were." - nerowolfgal

Not exactly. In the novel, "I'm not a girl" is all Eli can say without giving away too much too early at that time in the story. He later expands on this, when pushed by Oskar, with ...

‘Then what are you?’
‘Nothing.’
‘What do you mean, “nothing”?’
‘I’m nothing. Not a child. Not old. Not a boy. Not a girl. Nothing.’

Lindqvist, John Ajvide (2010-10-11). Let the Right One In (p. 188). Quercus. Kindle Edition.

Eli doesn't self identify as any gender, he is "nothing", and therefore, "not a girl". What the author was aiming for was innocence, as strange as that might sound for a story involving a Vampire, no sexual desires, just acceptance. Vampires are usually portrayed as creatures steeped in sexuality, able to seduce others and bend them to their will, Eli is the antithesis of the usual Vampire portrayal.

The "I'm not a girl", and the later "I'm nothing" statement in the novel, really only apply to Eli. There are two other Vampires that we meet, they are not presented in the same way at all. There is no implication, or even hint, that they too have been mutilated in the same way as Eli (although, your point might work with a metaphorical neutering for Vampires in general), this mutilation was exclusively reserved for Eli. Where it is true that the two other Vampires seem to possess high levels of blood lust, this doesn't hold for Eli. He hates having to consume only blood to survive, and hates himself for giving in to the hunger, further compounding his belief that he is not worthy of any status in life other than existing. He is "nothing". Not only is Eli a member of a group that must remain in the shadows of human society, he is an outlier within that tiny faction ... "nothing".

.

I hope your head cold passes soon.

.

- - - - - - - - - - -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0e3tGxnFKfE

http://tinyurl.com/LTROI-story

[–] drakkar 9 years ago

I think the reason for the original author of the story to add that was to underline the idea vampires HAVE no sex/gender. They become physically neutered, with all their desires and physical pleasure switched to blood-drinking, no matter what human gender they were.

In the novel, the point was to make a love story between pre-sexual kids. Eli and Oskar are mentally equal, their understanding about love converges throughout the book.
There is this passage about Oskar looking at porn pictures, not understanding what he sees. He's started to get interested, but he isn't "quite there" yet. Eli, on his side, believes that love is to help each other survive. It is little doubt that Eli is sexually exploited by Håkan, but he doesn't quite understand what's going on, except that it is unpleasant, and that is part of a barter game.

For the heart life is simple. It beats as long as it can.

[–] Dejay 9 years ago

Most 12 year old boys certainly are already "there" :)

What if find most strange is that Abby is still mentally 12 in this movie. One of the most creepy aspects for me is that she essentially is like a very old, horrid and powerful witch that drinks blood to remain young and beautiful. Abby isn't a kid she is an old crone who grooms and exploits young children.

Then again I recently heard that many of the pedophile priests have a "psychosexual maturity of 12-year-olds". In this movie Abby certainly seems genuinely in love with Oskar.

Or maybe she lived forever in seclusion. But she's smart. Solving a rubric cube on your own requires quite high intelligence. Why doesn't she learn and read to adapt better in the world? The methods they employ are also not very refined. So maybe that points to a very destructive way of life. She manages to stay alive but doesn't grow in any way.

Just thinking out loud about some things I didn't really get.

[–] HarpoSpoke 9 years ago

What if find most strange is that Abby is still mentally 12 in this movie. One of the most creepy aspects for me is that she essentially is like a very old, horrid and powerful witch that drinks blood to remain young and beautiful. Abby isn't a kid she is an old crone who grooms and exploits young children.

The director had some thoughts about that which might clear it up.

I don't get the sense that she's a 12-year-old who has a 250-year-old woman inside of her who's like a schemer. Rather, she's someone who was attacked 250 years ago and so was stuck internally at the age of 12. She's stuck in that level of emotional development. She never really got past that. There's something sad about that idea she'd never fully mature, even her emotion and brain would not go past that point. She learned how to be a survivor and get by, but she's still vulnerable in the way that a kid is vulnerable. She can't control these things. I thought that was a great metaphor for adolescence, when your body starts to change and things are out of control. It's evident in the way we depicted her. She didn't have fangs. The idea is similar to how your teeth go crazy after you lose your baby teeth. We made those teeth look like adolescence gone wrong. Her skin has lots of acne. All of that was an attempt to show the state she's in.

http://www.artistdirect.com/entertainment-news/article/let-me-in-director-matt-reeves-talks-technique-satan-and-taxi-driver/7638540

[–] Dejay 9 years ago

Thanks a lot! Yeah that's the vibe you get from this movie.

I guess thinking in retrospect about the movie my brain just can't quite wrap my head around it. Or maybe the original was a bit creepier.

[–] cassbtt 9 years ago

Solving a rubric cube on your own requires quite high intelligence

I think it was more a demonstration of the skills she gained from the enormous amount of time (decades) that she had to tinker with puzzles like the cube, like those we saw on the table in her apartment.

http://www.catconsulting.ca/themanyfacesofabby/index.htm

[–] HarpoSpoke 9 years ago

I think it was more a demonstration of the skills she gained from the enormous amount of time (decades) that she had to tinker with puzzles like the cube, like those we saw on the table in her apartment.

I think it was Realbullet who pointed out the possibility that it was something to do with vampires being fascinated with puzzles. I wasn't aware of that one. Apparently that's also the idea behind "The Count" on Sesame Street. Don't know if that's the case with Abby though.

[–] drakkar 9 years ago

What if find most strange is that Abby is still mentally 12 in this movie.

I'm not all that sure she really is. When Owen hears Abby berating Thomas through the wall, her voice sounds like she's sent from Satan, and the looks of vamped out Abby is also rather satanic.
When asked directly about Abby being "This evil puppet master", the director doesn't turn down the idea.
So you sure have a point.

http://www.artistdirect.com/entertainment-news/article/let-me-in-director-matt-reeves-talks-technique-satan-and-taxi-driver/7638540

[–] HarpoSpoke 9 years ago

When asked directly about Abby being "This evil puppet master", the director doesn't turn down the idea.

He never denies anyone their interpretation of course, but he did say he didn't see her that way.

With Abby's character, people have said, "She's totally manipulative, and she doesn't have feelings for him." I actually don't feel that way. Why can't she both? Why can't she be incredibly lonely, see something in Owen, connect with him and really have love for him? At the same time, why can't she also have this primal side that is incredibly evil and vicious and a dichotomy to that?

Pretty much how I see her. A dual natured being. Just like the novel version where the vampire side is a separate being lurking and urging the human side to do things they don't want to do.

[–] drakkar 9 years ago

He never denies anyone their interpretation of course, but he did say he didn't see her that way.

However, it appears that Hammer Film did.

Pretty much how I see her.

A possible interpretation, albeit a bit flawed one, considering how Abby is portrayed in the film.

[–] HarpoSpoke 9 years ago

However, it appears that Hammer Film did.

No idea what their opinion is. I agree with Reeves' view.

A possible interpretation, albeit a bit flawed one, considering how Abby is portrayed in the film.

I see lots of support for her as a dual being. First of course, there is Reeves' statement above. "At the same time, why can't she also have this primal side that is incredibly evil and vicious and a dichotomy to that?"

Just like in the book, when the hunger takes over, the vampire acts different than when they are not hungry and would do things they would never normally do. Virginia in the book thinks about how she wants to attack someone she loves. In LMI, Abby has to run away to keep from attacking Owen....clearly not something she would normally do. And even her voice takes on a whole new sound when she is in the throes of hunger with Thomas in that early scene. If Abby were a normal person, we would probably say she suffers from multiple personality disorder.

[–] drakkar 9 years ago

I see lots of support for her as a dual being. First of course, there is Reeves' statement above. "At the same time, why can't she also have this primal side that is incredibly evil and vicious and a dichotomy to that?"

So what you and Reeves basically say is that Abby really is the Daughter of Satan, but sometimes she hides it.
Fair enough for me.

[–] HarpoSpoke 9 years ago

So what you and Reeves basically say is that Abby really is the Daughter of Satan, but sometimes she hides it.
Fair enough for me.

You missed the "two sides" part. Abby is Abby. If she were "the daughter of satan" and was "hiding" it...that would be "one side".

[–] drakkar 9 years ago

Abby's duality or not, Spawn of Satan remains Spawn of Satan - even if you and Reeves also claim that this Evil Puppet Master has her good sides. Oh well.

[–] HarpoSpoke 9 years ago

Abby's duality or not, Spawn of Satan remains Spawn of Satan - even if you and Reeves also claim that this Evil Puppet Master has her good sides. Oh well.

Of course. And Abby remains Abby. The "spawn of Satan" is a separate entity.

It's outlined really well in the book in a couple of places how the vampire side is a separate entity.