Of Vampires, Zombies, and Other Things...

This weekend I watched the film “Let me in,” the American remake of the European film “Let the right one in,” which I saw a year ago. Curiously, both the original and the remake are being released in Mexico at the same time. It is difficult to define either film as the better one. The screenplay is extremely similar, and both feature excellent performances and direction that maintains the suspense. It is a vampire film—or rather, they are vampire films—but the vampiric condition of one of the characters is merely an additional twist in the plot. The real story is the discovery of love, sexuality, and codependency during puberty. I will not go into further details about the story because I recommend that you watch both films, or at least one of them. If you want help deciding which, I will tell you that the European film leaves more to the audience’s imagination and interpretation; it is a little slower, but more mature. The American one, on the other hand, takes care to explain some things more explicitly and has a little more suspense and more special effects, as one would expect. Most of those effects are restrained and realistic, except for the CGI, computer-generated images.

The advantage of watching both films is that one can make an interesting comparison between the European and American filmmakers’ visions, which says a great deal about how they see themselves as cultures. The European version, for example, is set in the present, while the American one is set in the 1980s. The only reason I can find for that choice is that it was the only way to tell a story about secondary-school children without iPods, YouTube, or Twitter. The American film has characters who are physically more “beautiful” and is charged with greater sexual tension than the European version—surprise, the roles have been reversed, and those who enjoy European cinema know what I mean.

I like this film, in both versions, because it is one of those films that leave room for reflection. Of course, as with many things in this world, one must dig a little. Many people will watch the film and remain on the surface, but there are many things about it on which to reflect. One interesting thing I was thinking about is our concept of the “vampire.” It is a curious concept because in any vampire film we watch, we know that certain “rules” exist in that universe and work either for or against vampires, the most popular being their inability to be exposed to sunlight. There are many other such rules, interpreted differently in each film, but what is interesting is that we, as the audience, do not need those rules explained to us in every film. The word vampire does not even have to be spoken. They simply have to show us an anthropomorphic figure drinking blood, and we immediately know that it is a vampire and that certain rules will exist in its universe. If we see that it comes out only at night, we understand that the sunlight rule applies here and need no further explanation. The same is true if we see that it shuns religious objects or cannot be reflected in a mirror; we already know why this is happening, and the film does not need to explain it. If someone had never been exposed to the media and had never seen, read, or heard absolutely anything about vampires, and then watched a vampire film, they would probably fail to understand many things that happen in it. Vampire stories therefore unfold on the assumption that readers or viewers possess certain basic knowledge that particular rules exist in the vampire universe.

Something similar happens in the universe of the zombie apocalypse, of which I am a fan. There are many kinds of zombies: fast, slow, strong, weak, products of radiation, witchcraft, a virus, or the wrath of God. Certain rules always apply, however. Zombies are always hungry and eat people. They can generally think a little or remember certain things because a part of who they were in life remains in them, but they cannot reason. Zombies are neither bad nor good; they are simply an unstoppable force that needs to feed on the flesh of human beings and sometimes other animals as well. Generally, the only way to kill a zombie is to destroy its brain. If someone dies from wounds inflicted by a zombie, that person will come back to life as a zombie.

This matter of zombies is very interesting. Their greatest presence is in cinema and video games, but an analysis of film reveals an evolution in the concept of zombies that reflects the fears of each era. If we watch zombie films from the 1950s or earlier, for example, we will see that zombies are products of black magic or an inexplicable demonic force, reflecting fear of the supernatural. If we watch films from the 1960s through the 1980s, the cause of the zombies is radiation or toxic waste, reflecting fear of pollution. And if we watch films from the 1990s through the 2000s, the cause of the zombies is a virus or bacterium, reflecting fear of biological weapons. We can therefore see how these films reflect the fears of their time. Besides reflecting fears, they reflect the culture of the era. One example is the original 1970s film “Dawn of the dead,” in which the characters take refuge in a shopping mall, something entirely new at the time. In one scene, as they arrive at the complex by helicopter, one character asks, “What is that?” and another answers, “One of those new shopping centres they are building?” This undoubtedly reflects a milestone in the history of American consumerism. It was a new phenomenon that found its way into the film. A similar example is the film “Dairy of the dead,” incidentally by the same director, George A. Romero, which shows the zombie apocalypse in the world of social networks, in the present day, where video cameras, mobile phones, and YouTube are the main media through which people interact. This film also reflects the culture of the time in which it was made.

And zombies leave even more room for reflection:

Why are they frightening? Because they are an unstoppable force without the capacity for reason or consciousness. They are also already dead and fear nothing; they have no survival instinct.

Why are they so bizarre? Because they explore one of the ideas we find most bizarre: cannibalism. They eat people, and if you fall into their hands, you will be torn apart and devoured while still alive. In addition, anyone can become a zombie—a family member or someone you love—and you would have to kill them in order to survive. The worst possibility is that you yourself could become one.

Where did the idea that they eat brains come from? I do not know where the idea originated. I have seen it more often in films from the 1980s, and it appears frequently in video games. What I do know is that the idea of having your brain eaten is horrifying because they are eating your essence. Think about this: any organ could be transplanted into you and you would remain yourself, but if your brain were transplanted, you would no longer be you. What makes you who you are, then, is your brain, and the idea of having it eaten is terrifying in a symbolic way.

Why is it exciting to be in the zombie apocalypse and kill as many as possible? Because it is the opportunity to kill “people” without remorse.

Now, if you like vampires and zombies, read the two novels published by Guillermo del Toro and Chuck Hogan—I have read only the first—in which there are vampires that function in a way similar to zombies. Or watch other zombie-vampire hybrids in the film “I’m a legend.”

So this time we managed to dig quite deeply. With a brief film recommendation, we ended up talking about vampires, zombies, and other things…