This time, they let the wrong one out

Believe me, it really brings me no pleasure at all to be kicking a dog when it's clearly down ($5 million in week one ... I didn't see that coming ... sheesh), but I've had a burning opinion about Matt Reeves' "Let Me In" that runs counter to all the critical praise I've been reading about it, so I just have to let it out.

Now, before I lay into it, please know that though I'm one of the many people who have nothing but big love for "Let the Right One In," the Swedish movie by director Tomas Alfredson, I certainly went into Reeves' take with more than an open mind. I had let the hype - through trailers, pictures, etc., - get me psyched for this, which just made it more of a failure when I finally got to see it.

And the real problem - and why this certainly should never have been made in the first place - is that Reeves really would have been damned no matter which way he decided to go with this.

Had he somehow turned this into a "Twilight" kind of affair, with older kids and more romance (as I'm sure some idiots at least asked him to do), this would have been an unmitigated disaster. As it is, he was, if anything, far too reverent of the original work, turning this far too often into just a shot-for-shot remake, making it all the more unnecessary.

Which is a shame because, when he has the courage to show it, Reeves often has a sure hand as a director. At moments in "Let the Right One In," there are things going on in the background that demand your attention and pay it off, but those are unfortunately outweighed by the simple imitation of Alfredson's work, and in almost every case it's a pale imitation at that.

By the time it gets to the end - and I won't spoil it any more for anyone who somehow hasn't seen either of these movies than by saying simply "pool" and "train" - you (or at least I) are left with the strongest sense that you've seen this all before, and done much better.

And unfortunately, except for focusing in even tighter on the kids at the story's core (more on that later), almost every change Reeves was brave enough to make was the wrong move.

First and foremost, his movie almost completely lacks in sense of place, one of the definite strong suits of "Let the Right One In." In the original, the bleak Swedish winter was used to tremendous effect to subtly amplify the isolation of Oskar and Eli. In Reeves' movie, however, apart from establishing that it is indeed awfully cold in Los Alamos, N.M., in the winter, this is almost completely lost, in large part due to the thoroughly obtrusive (and, although I'm well aware I'm repeating myself here, unnecessary) score by Michael Giacchino. When it isn't telegraphing what's coming next, it's simply eliminating any of the ethereal feel - often conveyed by silence - that enveloped the original movie.

And this lack of sense of place also extends to the supporting characters who populated the suburb of Stockholm. In "Let the Right One In," we not only meet this band of beaten-down survivors, but get to know them at least a bit. This made Eli's brutal attacks hit all the more harder. In Reeves' movie, however, we know almost nothing about the residents of Owen's (the American Oskar) neighborhood except for that he likes to watch them with his telescope, and that drains any emotional heft from what Abby (the American Eli) has to do to them to survive.

Which brings me to by final peeve with what Mr. Reeves has done here before, I promise, I will have something good to say about it too. When we finally see Abby (Chloe Grace Moretz) go on the hunt for blood, any real horror is almost completely mitigated by the cheesy, cheesy, cheesy (did I mention cheesy) CGI that Reeves chooses to employ. The attacks look so fake that I found myself laughing out loud, surely not the reaction that Reeves intended (or that the people around me who shot me glares wanted to hear.)

OK, like I said, I really did go into this with both an open mind and heart, and there certainly are some good things about Reeves' take too, and they all come down to the two kids at the story's core, played to nothing less than perfection by Moretz and Kodi Smit-McPhee. I can say without exaggeration that we are enjoying a rather remarkably strong class of young actors in movies these days, and these two should be at the forefront of that wave for many years to come.

Reeves' choice to focus in tighter on the relationship of Abby and Owen is rewarded by his young stars in almost every scene when they're alone together. Moretz and Smit-McPhee expertly map the range of emotions that each child feels, Abby from hesitancy to desperation and Owen in the opposite direction, until their paths ultimately converge. Two scenes in particular, when Owen tries to introduce Abby to the pure joy of candy and when he still thinks the "you have to invite me in" thing is a game, show that - and I never thought I would say this - both Moretz and Smit-McPhee improve upon the already stellar performances by Lina Leandersson and Kåre Hedebrant in "Let The Right One In."

Richard Jenkins also brings a welcome weariness to the role of Abby's "father," but ultimately, it all goes for naught because the movie they've clearly all poured their best work into just never should have happened. In the end, while certainly not as bad as Gus Van Sant's shot-for-shot take on "Psycho," Matt Reeves' "Let Me In" is yet another American remake of a superior film that, despite some outstanding acting, just had no business ever being made (and in case anyone's wondering, yes, I do have as much respect and affection for "Let the Right One In" as many more people have for Alfred Hitchcock's best movies.)

Will Miyazaki's "Ponyo" ever hit U.S. theaters?

Actually, the most depressing news out there is that Jackie Earle Haley has signed on to play Freddie Krueger in Platinum Dunes' remake of "A Nightmare on Elm Street." Digest that for a second.

Now, on paper, Mr. Haley as Freddie isn't that much of a stretch. He certainly has the manic look down, but any news about what Michael Bay's Platinum Dunes company is up to just turns my stomach and makes it do flips.

Remaking fun movies like "Friday the 13th" and "Nightmare" aren't exactly bold artistic moves, but neither are they really high cinematic crimes. But the Platinum Dunes folks have no plans to stop there; they've got real classics in their sights too.

Further along is a "retelling" (the dirty little euphemism used to claim you're not making a "remake") of Hitchcock's "The Birds." I'm still hoping this will never happen, but assuming it does it will star Naomi Watts in Tippi Hedren's iconic role and have Martin Campbell of "Casino Royale" fame as its director.

Even more insidious but still in pre-infancy stage (if that's possible) is the company's plan to remake what remains my single favorite horror film, Roman Polanski's "Rosemary's Baby." If anyone out there has the power to stop all this madness, please do!

OK, enough of that. This was supposed to be all about Hayao Miyazaki, a subject which makes me much, much happier.

It seems that not only does his new film, "Ponyo on a Cliff by the Sea" (to be retitled simply "Ponyo") finally have a U.S. release date of Aug. 14 (more than a friggin' year after it debuted in Japan!), but it also has some kids in the lead voice roles that just might give it enough cache to even open in my little corner of the world.

Ensuring that Billy Ray Cyrus will apparently be able to live off the talents of his kids forever, it seems there's another little Cyrus running around, named Noah, and he has landed the titular role of the goldfish princess who just wants to be human. Just in case that's not enough Disney for you, it seems that yet another of those Jonas kids, someone named Frankie, will voice the role of Sosuke, the young boy who befriends Ponyo.

I really have no idea who any of those people are, but if that's what it takes to finally bring this to American movie theaters, bring it on. Among the adults involved in this are Cate Blanchett, Matt Damon, Tina Fey and Liam Neeson.

And in even better news that only impacts, well, me, I'm off to see "Adventureland" today at 2:15, and I'm fairly confident it's just going to rule. Peace out.

Remake news so bad I couldn't possibly make it up

This being Monday and all, I'd love to be the bearer of better news. And at least part of me hopes you've all heard this somewhere else first to soften the blow.

When I first heard the idea that someone would actually remake "The Birds," I just assumed it was some kind of urban legend. No one would really do that, would they?

Well, as has happened at least once before, it seems I'm wrong. I hope Martin Campbell lives a long time and makes a lot more movies, because it's gonna take a heck of a lot of good karma to survive this.

Until now he's had a good enough run. "Casino Royale" was the best Bond movie in many, many years, and his "Zorro" sequel was fun enough. The ride stops, however, stops when he puts his hands on Hitchcock.

Here, as far as I can muster from the French site Cinempire.com, are the details: The bold fools who will write this abomination for Campbell are Paul Harris Boardman and Scott Derrickson (the team that wrote "The Exorcism of Emily Rose," a surprisingly entertaining flick.) In case you haven't vomited from all this yet, brace yourself, because it only gets worse.

What do you do when you know you're taking on a remake that should never even be started? Call it a "re imagining," of course. The formerly fairly talented Todd McFarlane is doing the same thing with "The Wizard of Oz," unless I rather quickly develop a talent like Maya's on "Heroes" and can do the world a big favor by taking all these idiots out (stay tuned, by the way, for much better news about "Heroes" in the next segment.)

And, worst of all about this madness: Naomi Watts is at least rumored to be in negotiations to fill the shoes of Tippi Hedren (who, I was pleasantly surprised to find, is still alive and kicking.) If she still has the energy at age 77, I would hope she'd use her foot on Ms. Watts' also rather pleasant posterior to kick enough sense into her to get her to just say no to this.

Whew. That's a lot of bile for a Monday morning, so how about some much better news about another blonde I like even more than Naomi?

Veronica Mars on "Heroes" tonight!

Just typing that was enough to make me smile, so I indeed hope I have that right. I've enjoyed hearing Kristen Bell's voice on "Gossip Girl" (yes, I'll admit it, I watch that), but it will be so much better to see her face again too on "Heroes."

As far as I can tell from the commercial, she's pursuing Peter Petrelli (Milo Ventamiglia) for some reason. The best NBC could come up with for a tagline was "what power will she have?" I would have at least added "Veronica Mars back on TV? F*** yeah!) A bit misleading, perhaps, but much more effective. Definitely tune in tonight.

More incredibly bad news

Sorry to alternate like this, but I'm still not fully awake, to be honest.

What's worse than a thoroughly unnecessary remake? In my book it would have to be these so-called "spoof" movies that won't just die. Apparently enough people (though hopefully no one reading this) went to see "The Comebacks" in week one that it made nearly $6 million. Not a ton, I guess, but probably enough to justify it's excremental existence.

Can it get any worse? After you watch this clip, you'll know the answer is definitely yes. I won't spoil it for you, because it's something you have to see to believe. I'll just leave you with a few questions. If you steal complete scenes from a flick, when does it stop being a "spoof" and just become a crime? And, not that I want to see her more often, but does Carmen Electra have a contract that only allows her to star in these flicks?. Anyways, I won't delay your agony any further. Click on the video if you dare, and please, please, remember I'm just the messenger. Peace out.