Varför blir du rädd?

Skräckfilmer är idag en betydligt mer accepterad genre än vad den var för bara några årtionden sedan.
Vad är det då som gör att människan tycker om att se på saker som skrämmer dem?
Det är inte den frågan som jag tänker svara på nu, utan det jag ska försöka att skriva om, är det faktum att det inte alltid är det monstruösa som skrämmr en, utan det kan vara det helt vardagliga.

Om vi ser på några av de skräckfilmer som tar sig som mest läskiga i min ögon så ligger där Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween, Coraline och The Others. Något som tre av dem har gemensamt är att de alla utspelar sig i miljöer som man kan känna igen. (Nightmare on Elm Street anser jag är läskig av den orsaken att Kreuger ger sig på en där man ingenting kan göra något det. I drömmarna. Man kan inte be om hjälp, och man kan inte hjälpa sig själv. Gör det Kreuger till genial, eller bara en fegis?)

Om vi tar första exemplet som jag skulle vilja titta närmare på så är det Halloween. I originalfilmen så ser vi ett helt vanlig (om än bråkig) amerikansk familj, där yngste pojken har tendenser mot det makabra. Man skulle kunna kalla Mike Meyers för en psykopat, men det som gör det är att han egentligen inte är ett monster i stil med Dracula eller zombies, utan han är en helt vanlig människa, och filmen utspelar sig i helt vanliga miljöer som man kan känna igen sig i. Det behövs inget odött monsturöst för att skapa monster helt enkelt, ondska finns runtomkring oss.

Coraline jobbar på samma sätt. Boken, tänkt som en barnsaga, handlar om Coraline, vars föräldrar jobbar för mycket, och ofta har annat att göra än att leka med Coraline, som istället börjar att utforska för sig själv. Hon lyckas att hitta portalen till en annan värld. En värld som ser ut precis som den hon kommer från, men lite gladare, lite färgrannare, och med bättre föräldrar. Kruxet är, föräldrarna har knappar till ögonen. Mamman, som i alla andra aspekter är den perfekta mamman (hon lagar god mat till Coraline, och de båda vill leka med henne, och låter henne göra vad hon vill), visar sig vara inget annat än ondskefull, och tar barnens liv ifrån dem. Genom att invagga Coraline i en idyll värld, så försöker hon att få Coralina att ge sitt liv till henne. Vilket barn skulle inte vilja ha ett sådant liv som Coralines andra mamma ger henne?

Vi har här två exempel där det idylliska får besök av ett monster.
Det är i sådana här filmer som det är svårare att skilja på fiktion och verklighet. När börjar det påhittade, och när är världen precis som den är utanför filmen?

Just fallet med Halloween tycker jag är det mest talande för sådana här fall av skräckfilm. Mike Meyers är sprungen ur människa, vare sig utan att ha dött tidigare, eller att ha druckit någon konstig häxbrygd för att få några som helst krafter.

Personligen är jag fortfarande rädd för att någon kväll vakna och se att ljuset från fönstret störs av något, och att det står en livslevande Mike Meyers utanför.

There is only one Lisbeth Salander!

Rooney Mara is the actress who are portraying Lisbeth Salander in the Hollywood remakes of the Swedish film-trilogy based on Stieg Larsson's books.

It is, as usual that Hollywood can not leave perfectly good films alone but has to come along and ruin them it hurts when you see one of your favorite fictional characters becoming someone you do not recognize.

Noomi Rapace will alway be the Lisbeth Salander loved by those who like the movies.

Haven't we seen Hollywood ruin enough movies for us now?

I wonder why there even is a remake market for foreign films. As I see it, they do the remake, and people forget the original, or don't even know there is a original film. Is this because Hollywood is so scared that they will loose their status within the film-industry? Or are Americans to lazy to read the subtitles?

I doubt that any country ever will have as enormous film-industry as there are in Hollywood, even if they stopped doing remakes on foreign films.

While Noomi Rapace looks like a bad ass, as Lisbeth is, Mara looks like a wannabe-rock star.

Lisbeth Salander is not just dark clothes and lots of make-up, Lisbeth is a broken person, and that's the most important part, I doubt anyone could do that as good as Noomi does.

Also, this is bothering in the question: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/jacketcopy/2011/10/hm-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo.html. Why do one need a clothes collection to look like Lisbeth Salander? (I guess the american version of her). 

After watching the trailer one wonder, have they actually changed anything, or is it exactly the same, and in that case, wouldn't it have been cheaper to subtitle the original film? Is it really such a bother for American people to watch something from another culture than their own? Is it so hard to understand the context of objects and people, as we always have to do as most of the films shown worldwide are recorded in an american context, even though the settings might be from somewhere else?

No, there is only one, Lisbeth Salander.

(I will most probably come back to this subject when the remakes have hit Sweden around Christmas)

Personal trivia:

I have known for a while that the film was going to be made, and I hated the idea, always wondering what idiot director that's going to ruin my love for films this time. Today (27th October 2011) I checked, and realized that the director of this film is the director of many films I dislike, and he is using Brad Pitt in many of them. This can not become more horrible...

Also, I dislike Daniel Craig, he ruined James Bond for me...

*Edit 30/10 -2011*
http://www.aftonbladet.se/webbtv/noje/film/article13666143.ab
One of the trailers for the film.
The dialog are awful! I mean really, really awful!
Thank you Hollywood, for ruining a perfectly good film! It's appreciated.

Bright Star

Bright Star is directed by Jane Campion and released in 2009.

Plot

Bright Star is a film about the love-story of poet John Keats and Fanny Brawne and it is based on the book with the same name.

John Keats, a poet of the 19th Century, living with his friend Charles Brown in the outskirts of London. Trough Brown and the Dilkes family, Keats gets in touch with the Brawnes, and their daughter Fanny. Keats being a mediocre poet, does not dare to get to close to Fanny, even though he is drawn to her, because he can not offer her wealth or a steady life. At the same time as he tries to understand his feelings for Fanny and write, he is also taking care for his sick brother. 

Brown tries all he can to keep Fanny and John from each other, but he does not succeed. He tries to kick him out, and send him away, but in the end, Fanny and John becomes lover. After a trip to London, though, John becomes sick (most probably from the same illness his brother had), and some of his friends decides that a trip to Italy is the best way to make sure he gets well. Meanwhile, the maid in the Brawne house, becomes with child, and Brown accepts to pay for the child, and this makes it impossible for him to accompany Keats to Italy, instead, he will be the one who reads the letter from Italy to Fanny and her mother, which tells them of the death of the poet. 

Opinion

The film was a lot better than I thought it would be. I do not like the actors that much, but they are bearable. I have not seen anything made by Campion before (no, I have not seen The Piano before either), but she seems as looking at what other films she had done, to like this poetic kinds of film.

I was a bit suspicious, Keats being alongside Byron and Poe, one of my favourite 19th Century poets, on whether I would like the film or not.

I did like the use of poems trough the film, as I guess, to show emotions the no one could put words to, in hint things. Fanny using literature and poetry in a way to come close to the one she loves, even though there is obstacles in the way, she wanting to know everything about the interests of her love, even though her own interests lies elsewhere. 

If you want to look at a  sad romance film, this is the film to watch, so don't assume it is a film on the life of John Keats, then you will be annoyed on how they only care for the love story and his love poems. 

Tim Burton's Art for exhibition in Los Angeles

http://www.lacma.org/art/exhibition/tim-burton

The Los Angeles County Museum of Art are going to show bits and pieces of the director Tim Burton's (Beetlejuice, Nightmare Before Christmas, Batman) art from his whole career.

According to the article, there will be more than 700 pieces of art up for display, bot illustrations, photos, paintings, animations and other things Burton have made during his long career in the show-business.

Tim Burton himself will open the exhibitions at 10AM on Saturdays and Sundays as soon as they open (Oct 1st).

Dracula (1992) Spoiler alerts!

Plot
Jonathan Harker (Keanu Reeves) travels to Transylvania to help Count Dracula (Gary Oldman) to buy property in London. Dracula finds the photo of Harker's wife-to-be Mina (Winona Ryder), and becomes obsessed with her. Mina is, when Harker is away, visiting her friend Lucy (Sadie Frost), whom becomes very sick. Arthur Holmwood (Cary Elwes) orders for the Doctor, Jack Seward (Richard E. Grant), but he has no idea what could have happened to Lucy, and in turn sends for his friend Abraham Van Helsing (Anthony Hopkins) who says it is because of Nosferatu. Mina gets romantically involved with the vampire, without knowing who he is.

Mina goes to Romania, marries Jonathan, and keeps quiet about her adventures with the vampire, but after Van Helsing tells them they have to kill him, she agrees and follows, and her secret is out.

Opinion
This film is one of the worst Dracula films. They claim to keep to the book, but it is very few parts of the film that do. The effects are really poor made, and the ideas are poor in all.
Reeves makes a really bad impression, there is no love to be this role in his acting, and the love story between Dracula and Mina is just stupid. The Count becomes a vampire in the same category as Edward Cullen, Bill Compton and other "humanvampires" of today, and not the monster he is in the book.
The worst acting, among many really poor ones, is anyhow Lucy. She does noting else but swirls around in bed, and then explodes. That was not very nice.

I would not recommend to see this film if you want the magic of Dracula, nor if you want a nice vampire story. The only reason one should watch this is to see how poor it is.

Trolljegeren (Trollhunter)

Plot

A grupp studenter från Volda i Norge, gör som projekt ett repotage om björnjakt, där björnar skjuts utanför säsong, av någon som inte alls är björnjägare.

De tre vännerna följer efter mannen genom Norge, och han varnar dem för att göra det. När de hittar honom i skogen, kommer det fram att det finns bra mycket farligare saker i skogen än björnar.

Åsikt

En fiktiv dokumentär i samma anda som Blair Witch Project, Rec, och Paranormal Activity (även om man kan se att de flesta likheterna finns till Rec, där de också har ett filmteam). Dock är den här filmen betydligt roligare, och man får faktiskt se vad det läskiga är. Det får man inte riktigt i de andra filmerna.

Troll känns väldigt norskt, och det här konceptet passar mycket bra. Det finns både humor, och samhällskritik i filmen. Den är välgjord, och de troll som finns med är riktiga bestar, även om endel av dem liknar John Bauers troll. Det kändes också väldigt skönt att filmen inte dominerades av saker som Griegs I bergakungens sal även om man kände igen termen (det norska ordet för bergakung är dobregubbe, som var just namnet på ett av trollen).

Norge har på sistone gjort några riktigt bra filmer (där ibland Snarveien, Död Snö, Fritt Vilt) och den här blir lätt en del av samlingen!

Det finns lite få saker som man kan sitta och irritera sig på i storyn, men man har lätt överseende för dem för att allt annat är riktigt bra.

Rekommenderas definitivt!

Super 8

Plot
Joseph Lamb (Joel Courtney) looses his mother in a accident at the steel factory, at the moment he and his friends are recording a film about zombies. After convincing Alice Dainard (Elle Fanning) to play the wife of the private detective they decide to shoot the scene, at night, at a railroad track. They witness the train crash, and the military take over the small Ohio Town.
The deputy Jackson Lamb (Kyle Chandler), tries to uncover the truth, not knowing his son are in the middle of it. The truth turns out to be something no one would ever have guessed.

Opinion
One can straight away see this is a work of Steven Spielberg (most famous for among other E.T, Jurassic Park, Schindler's List, and the TV-series Taken (where he also worked with the sister of Elle Fanning, Dakota)). Spielberg loves to show us young heroes (found in E.T and Taken), and things no one knows existed. The monster in this film had, when looked close upon, a great touch of E.T in him, and also, the films takes place in a time, when people (mostly adults) are afraid of the outside, the cold war is at it's peek, and everyone is scared.
J.J Abrams, (the producer of Lost, Alias and Cloverfield) on the other hand seem to like technical things. Some of the props in this film had a close resemblance to things we can see in Alias, but the "oh, we can't really see the monster until the end of the film"- is somewhat close to how he made Cloverfield.

I guess I could say you should go see the film. There are some lose treads (as we know J.J Abrams, had the same idea with Lost), unseen monsters that might ruin the experience. Joe is very similar to the character of Elliot in E.T, and the second Fanning sister, are rather similar to her older sister, as she was portraying Allie (yeah, not much of a name change, as Alice were called Allie throughout the film) in Taken.

What's good with the film is the first half, where the monster is unknown. We just know something is lurking, but we have no real idea what it is, except dangerous. Also, the fact that they do not work with stereotype teenagers (or youngsters on the brink of becoming teenagers), as are done in many films (another films working that well too is Mysterious Skin). That was nice to see. There were all kind of outsiders, but there were no real "cool gang".

If you like E.T, Lost and Alias (preferably in a combination) go see the film, otherwise, don't. Or at least don't spend money on seeing it in the movies.