Good and fairly faithful to the original, but obviously not as good as Let the Right One In.

The comparison between original version and 'this'? Hmm, let's think. Låt den rätte komma in - brilliant idea, brilliant movie; Let me in - like Americans always do - just a copy, FUCKED UP copy.

Why re-make something that was already so good? A decent effort, still, but completely useless when a better version of it already exists.

I knew from the start that Let Me In is a remake, but this is literally scene by scene, almost verbatim, the exact same movie. I already have a hard time swallowing remakes to begin with, but I can understand sometimes when the movie has been outdated and is need of a remake by the right director, but this came out only 2 years after the original. There is absolutely no need for a remake that soon, unless for two reasons, to add more to the story, or simply because people hate reading subtitles

Decent enough, but only a shadow of the quality proven in the original Swedish Let the Right One In.

Although I think the original is far superior, this is a very well done remake. The two young leads did very well in their roles, but Chloe Moretz as Abby did not have the iconic feel that Lina Leandersson brought to the character of Eli (that's ok - she always has Hit-Girl). The narrative here is a little more solid (in a traditional sense) than in the original, but I'm not sure that is a good thing. The meanderings of the original contributed to its atmosphere and were part of its charm.

Watch the original or better yet, read the book. This one has nothing on them. The atmosphere, the acting, the underlining music.. Ugh! They made a gloomy Nordic horror story into a sappy Yankee indie.

Not as crass and over the top as most American remakes of foreign films are, this version still suffers in every way compared to the original, losing most of its subtlety and all of its complexity. The manipulative, intrusive score is the film's biggest downfall, and unlike the original, nothing in this version is particularly beautiful or awe-inspiring.

This was a remake of an astounding German film, but it seems too forced to be good

Pointless remake with nothing to add. Everything is weaker than the original except for the on par acting.

While it's great that this remake loses nothing in the translation (there r no concessions 2 the mainstream here: the chilling atmosphere, the focus on the darker aspects of humanity & startling imagery r fully intact) it brings nothing new 2 the table either. Although the cinematography is stunning, it's unlikely anyone who's already seen the original won't feel watching this is as boring & pointless an exercise as the Psycho remake. But add 30 points if u never saw this its first time around.

RAGE

A sufficiently made sequel that fails to lock everything in place. Words and sounds take up where there should be silence. Fields and snow seem less lonely. Clarity displaces mystery. Insinuation displaces interrogation. A film of which the original so deeply committed to integrate you in the isolation of childhood now seems content to guide you along. Is it still great? Yes. Did it need to be made? Not at all. Is it as good as the original? Not at all. Not its fault but that's how it goes.

Retains the photographic beauty of the original while losing elements of complexity and subtlety that make the first film such a solid entry in the horror genre. What is clearly on display here is a deeply horrific vision of 1980s American society, so degraded and misguided that a young bullied boy has only an incarnation of evil and death to turn to for friendship--his parents have turned inward, the law is powerless to help him, and the authorities at his school are unaware of his troubles.

A great mix of melancholy and beauty. The metaphors, I think, that everyone can get one to your own life.

Neutered version of the original film that panders to audiences too lazy to read subtitles. It's OK, but completely lacking subtlety...it's just not as good as the real thing.

More accessible than it's predecessor, for this American anyway, it is still really not possible to top the first adaptation of "Let the Right One In." Whether she is Abby or Hit Girl, Chloe Moretz is a star. Smit-McPhee is also pretty good. Im not sure how I feel about the CGI moments. I sort of think that it adds to the period vibe of the movie. As far as the direction goes, Reeves feeds us a little more, at the expense of Alfredson's level of nuance- Reeves still uses a delicate hand.

Pointless, in that it adds nothing and subtracts plenty, but the parts that intrigued me about the original, how warm and touching it felt, were kept intact.

(Disclaimer: I have not seen the original.) Story is not that interesting, most characters are stereotypes. Establishes an intriguing mood and contains some truly disturbing images, though at other points the cgi can be a bit laughable (bed on fire).

Solid remake but nowhere on par with the original.

It is very similar to the original, which begs the question, why even remake it? It was about equally as good. The scene in where the 'protector' guy is trapped in the car with two guys was really well done. I thought some of the gore was unnecessary, specifically the whole acid thing. The bullies were a bit one dimensional. They seemed to pick on him just 'because'. It ended on sort of a happy / bleak note, depending on how you look at it. It was kind of a pointless movie, but a decent watch.

Didn't know anything about it before I watched it, and thought it would just be a scary monster movie. Not scary, but ended up really loving it.

I don't understand why Hollywood felt the need to do a remake of Let The Right One In. The original was so good and captivating, which the remake isn't. I mean it's an all right film, but that's all it is.

Unnecessary remake. It's good, but better watch the great swedish original movie.

Just not exciting enough to make me want to score it higher. Still though, a pretty interesting story.

a remake the film industry did right, it is the same film as the original.