MentalMaden

I think you meant :27 but yeah, it looks like that.

Riley did beg Young to do it, stating that he was in great pain. It's not like it was Young's idea.

I like this idea.

As I said in my review, if you liked the first you'll like this one. It's not trying to reinvent LTROI by any means.

Well funny you should ask. As soon as I got out of the theater and home it was time for No Ordinary Family and then so on and so on and so on then sleep then work then NOW I have time to write out my thoughts.

<<<Consider anything below a spoiler>>>







A little background for perspective reasons. I bought the book and the movie at the same time when it first came out on DVD (Target had some kind of special on the two together or something like that if I remember). I made a point to read the book first then watch the movie after. Really enjoyed both, a lot. Went to see LMI yesterday afternoon. (as stated before)

Overall- I think it's a good rendering of the source material, maybe a tad incomplete. The book itself is pretty dense with information and many more characters but I think the American version did a good job of telling the core story while hitting most of the important plot points along the way (just as the Swedish film did). The child actors did a great job and I think it's safe to say that Chloe Moretz is going to be a huge star one day. As far as it's relationship to the Swedish movie they both feel extremely similar in look, tone and pace. They did seem to take strides in making the two movies feel like the same story. My first feeling was it seemed like the movies were twins, but fraternal twins. I'll agree with someone earlier who said if you liked the first chances are you'll like the second. I'd venture a guess if you hated the Swedish film you won't care much for the American version. I enjoyed it and think as a remake it worked and as a film it worked.

Differences- (And I'd like to point out not all of the things I'll list here are necessarily bad, just different. I'll try to give my take on pro or con.) They did play a little bit with the relationship between Abby and "her father" and their relationship to make it seem less sexual and more old friendship. But I would point out that they didn't take that possibility off the table either, just that it seemed a little more platonic. The book and the Swedish film don't shy around the subject, it is what it is. Personally I think it's pretty important to the story, and while it's a very uneasy subject I think it does add a dimension of sadness and terror to the original story. Leaving this out, or at least heavily covered it up, didn't ruin the movie for me though. It just made the story a little more "shallow" or "unflavored". (More on this in a minute) They also did up the BOO! moments a bit and threw in a bit more gore, none of which were gratuitous or over hyperstylized like some American horror cliches. At some points it was a bit too CGI-y, but not a gamestopper. One thing I did notice very different from Swedish movie and book was the fact that most of the victims were relatively unknown to the viewer, where the book and even the Swedish film did a good job of letting us get to know these people and that makes their deaths all the more jarring (personally).

I really wanted to see the barfly's and hear their stories and see their stories. Having Virginia/Victoria and her story get distilled down to a few minutes didn't carry the weight it did in book or original film. Her transformation is the moment where the reader and viewer start to realize a lot of plot points up to that moment: why Eli sends Hakan to collect the blood, if she does have to feed directly from someone why she has to break their neck, etc. What took place over many days and was tragic and touching at the same time, was pretty much turned into a fancy FX shot. Sad, but not fatal. I also think there were subtle changes in the approach towards the children. This Owen (Oscar) was a little less sympathetic to me, and a bit more accepting of what Abby was doing. The Swedish Oscar (Owen) seemed a bit more innocent and less accepting to me. I think there was something very interesting and menacing in having the Swedish film Eli (Abby) be androgynous whereas the American version was so cute and feminine. The only way to make her stand out was not wearing shoes in the winter. The Swedish version had an otherworldly quality about their appearance that, for me, brought a certain cache and weight (and as I said in another post a sadness) to the part. The thing about the original characters in the book was they were both misfits and while we see Owen getting treated like a misfit, we don't get that from Abby as she looks relatively normal, especially after bathing. But as I said Chloe Moretz did a great job. Their relationship in the American version was fleshed out a little more and did have a bit more romance and sweetness (and suprisingly a bit more sexuality) than either the book or original movie did. Not enough to change the overall feel, but palapable and I think another way to soften it for the "American audience". In the book it was less about physical attraction and more about friendship between two friendless outcasts.


Back to the American Abby (Eli) and her "father". With the changes they made here it greatly changed the dynamic of the ending, even though it's almost a word-for-word/frame-for-frame recreation. Where in the book and first movie, it's more like two lost souls riding off into the sunset, what you see in this version is that she's merely recruiting her next companion and that Owen will end up with the same sad fate as "The Father". So in a way, maybe this ending works better, because upon looking back at the original two, that was what he'd end up being anyway; he was afterall, a boy and she a vampire. So it's hard to say which "works", but the American ending was a little less arty and a little more pragmatic.

Like with most adaptations my preference lies with the book (the original source material) as I think it has many more layers of flavor and nuance that you can't get from shortform media. While the overall story isn't really about what kind of "relationship" Abby has with the Father, it gives a depth and sadness to the character and the book that goes beyond a little boy and girl becoming friends against great odds. Some people prefer a distilled story, some like the full course dinner. Me, I like my books wordy with a gross amount of details. A comparison of the movies as I said before: fraternal twins or two sides of the same coin...if you like one you'll like the other yadda yadda. BUT I would encourage anyone to partake of any combination of these properties, they are all quite good and can be enjoyed alone, as a duo or even a full set.

Edit to reduce block o' text.

Gross speculation:

Maybe the devs are tying all of the transports (trams and ferries) because with Oro under attack we won't have our favorite little shortcuts anymore.

While I realize it's not exactly the same, isn't side switching and Any-AT-starting-Praetoria sort of doing something proliferation-esque? I'm enjoying my blueside Praetorian stalker.

/shrug


But I do want to see ice stalkers.

"Is it cold in here to you?"
"Hey, what's that?"
"Oh nothing, just a big block of ice someone left lying around."
"Did it just move?"
"Eh, don't pay it no mind. What's the worst that could happen? It's just ice."

ASSASSIN FREEZE!!!!

Pffft, I prefer to play with my eyes closed anyway. I like a little challenge.

In the theater now for a matinee. Will post after with my thoughts.

A controller is it's own status protection.

All this machinery
Making modern music
Can still be open-hearted
Not so coldly charted
Its really just a question
Of your honesty

One likes to believe
In the freedom of music
But glittering prizes
And endless compromises
Shatter the illusion
Of integrity

Well its just not a damage pet, the only damage it even does is a minor damage aura, so what would be the point of giving it damage enhancing sets?

Dark Servent does not accept damage enhancements of any kind, therefore regular pet IO sets and recharge intensive pets (which has damage) can't be slotted. It instead takes the control/buff/debuff sets all of which have plenty of recharge available.