Ryan McNeil
There once was a horror movie sequel that used the tagline “Do you dare to climb these steps again?”. It’s a great question not just for the movie it stokes up, but for all tales of chilling violence. Do we want to revisit the scene of the crime over and over like voyeurs? Do we dare not look away as heinous acts are committed and motives of hate are uncovered? Do we revel in the actions of someone who seems truly maladjusted?
I can’t say for sure about those steps, but as the last three questions pertain to THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO, the answers seem to be “yes”, “yes”, and “yes”.
The movie begins by introducing us to Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig). Blomkvist is the lead reporter and co-editor of a national Swedish magazine. We learn very quickly that Blomkvist has lost a libel lawsuit and faces both jail time and a heavy fine. However, before he can get to either, he is offered an opportunity by a philanthropist named Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer). Vanger’s niece disappeared many years ago, and he wants Blomkvist to uncover he captor (and perhaps killer), to finally give him some solace.
In deciding whether Blomkvist is right for the job, Vanger has him thoroughly investigated by a private firm. The firm tasks Blomkvist’s background to their best – but most aloof – investigator. She is a young woman named Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara) and her piercings, wild hair, and taste for black leather make her look more suited to be working in a tattoo parlor than a corporate office. But off-putting as she might look – and aloof as she might act – there’s no denying that Salander is tremendously smart, and truly tech-savvy.
Salander is a ward of the state, and spends much of the film’s first half trying to keep her frayed life from coming apart at the seams. But her work on Blomkvist’s dossier impressed Vanger so much, that he suggests the disgraced reporter take her on as a research assistant on the case of the missing girl.
Thus, an uneasy partnership is born…
The evolution of David Fincher has been wonderful to watch. Beginning with films that were “cooler” than they were great, he was quick to establish a look and tone that other directors tried to copy. In many cases, those copycats came off feeling a bit toothless. Now almost twenty years removed from his first feature, Fincher has sharpened his fangs and continually makes films that execute on all levels, even if the story he’s chosen to adapt is flawed. More than anything else, THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO is a clinic in execution as its every sound and vision leaves the audience feeling unsettled.
The film is cold and remote, underlined of course by most of the story being set on that Swedish island in the dead of winter. Its colour palette is quite muted, so much so that I found myself wondering what the film would look like in black and white. While that sense of isolation is usually distancing when it comes to watching films, the tone suits this film rather well. After all, this take of men who hate women is truly terrible – something one would usually rather endure than enjoy. Had the film been painted with brushes of warmth and comfort, it would have seemed like a complete betrayal.
At the centre of it all is Rooney Mara and her portrayal of Lisbeth Salander. What underlines Salander’s character is the way she seems detached from what’s happening around her. Mara does something interesting in adding a measure of ambivalence to her manner. On the page, Salander seems remote: Mara’s portrayal kills that remote feeling and replaces it with a woman who doesn’t care which social graces she’s casting aside. Mara’s Salander is a steel-eyed curiosity, making for an intriguing arrangement of a familiar song.
Beyond the solid individual performance, Mara also finds a nuanced chemistry with Daniel Craig (though I doubt it’s tricky to strike up chemistry with James Bond). Their relationship comes with a bit less chill than one would expect, though it still isn’t exactly a steamy rendez-vous. They find a curious mixture of stewardship and personal bond – a mixture that allows them to alternately take the lead depending on the moment at hand. It comes with a few sexual undertones of course, but watching the way Craig and Mara care about each other, but never actually admit it gives this story a little bit of warmth it never had before. Only a little mind you – by and lagre this is a chilly 2+ hours.
This was the third time I’ve been told the tale of THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO, and with repetition comes the inescapable fact that the story structure is flawed. It does odd things with its ending, and in this iteration seems to be in a huge hurry to put all of the pieces on the board. However, flawed as it is, there’s no escaping the fact that the story has a lot to offer and will continue to haunt the audience no matter how many times they’ve heard it. It’s an icy, grisly tale laced with moments of pure venom – and of all the ways I’ve been told the story, this might well be the best. Might
The question of how this film stacks up against its Swedish predecessor is, I believe, a non-factor. The two films have done things subtly different, and how those differences play will depend entirely up to the audience and their taste. One could champion this film for Fincher’s overall vision…one could just as easily praise the Swedish film for Noomi Rapace’s chilling performance. Others still could say that neither film fully captured all the texture of the book. The answer only comes down to which singer you like best to sing the song.
I buckled and read. Since we discussed it briefly on Friday, I didn’t feel like I was ruining anything by reading your review. And it seems to be getting a lot of acclaim, stamping out much of the arguments of the pessimists who thought the reason for a remake was that Mer’kans don’ read no subtahtles.
I need to see this film for a bigger reason, though – Trent & Atticus’s soundtrack. I still get all giddy watching THE SOCIAL NETWORK because it’s one of the few films where I know the soundtrack better than the film itself. Hearing their work in massive DTS is aural bliss.
Ah yes, the score…
Not sure if it was just my screening, but the music in this film was cranked up beautifully high (Thought my chest was going to explode when Karen O was screaming through the credit sequence).
The score underlines what’s happening on the screen amazingly well – perhaps moreso than their previous contribution to THE SOCIAL NETWORK!
Definitely check it out for that.
You are far too kind. This film is all craft and little else, far too long, and a redundant waste of one of America’s more interesting studio filmmakers. I can’t fault the filmmaking, but the subject and story is not nearly as compelling as some people make it out to be. Despite all the gloss and supposed sturm und drang in Lisbeth’s railing against the machine, the whole affair is rather chaste, and dare I say….Boring?
An alternative take, from a guy sitting 4 seats down the aisle from Mr. Hatter:
http://www.rowthree.com/2011/12/13/review-the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-2/
OK, so you’re not a fan…
I wouldn’t say it’s “little else”. I think most of what rubbed you the wrong way came back to story – a story that is admittedly flawed and could have done with some editing before the publishing stage. Still, there are so many elements to like:
– Mara’s take on an already iconic character
– That score that Sean alreeady mentioned
– The stark, chilly look of the film overall
– Craig’s performance, which I actually prefered to Nyqvist’s
– The use of a particular song in a particular scene
I hear you on not digging it, and that it didn’t seem to want to do anything new with the material, but I would never call this film boring.
As for it being a waste of Fincher’s ta;lents, think of it this way – he rhymed this one off just over a year after his last film. It wasn’t like he toiled over it for half a decade. I’m sure Going back to ZODIAC, it feels like he’s been on a “one for me / one for them” rhythm. So the next film should be for him…which will likely be more to your liking.
I think part of the problem with the story is that the original books were never edited, therefore no one really knows what Larsson may have gotten rid of, kept in, or changed entirely. Because of that anyone trying to adapt the story to screen is working with an incomplete vision. The story is flawed because it never got the polish it needed. So if one can get passed the fact that the story is fundamentally flawed, there does appear to be other things worth watching the film for.
Also, as Hatter says, directors are subject to contractual obligation too, agreeing to do certain films the studio wants them to do, while getting to work on their personal pieces as a trade off. I remember reading somewhere that Nolan agreed to do THE DARK KNIGHT only if (among necessary creative requirements) he could do INCEPTION on WB’s distribution dime.
Exactly.
Sean, you and I have talked about this where U2 is concerned before. If they release a so-so album, it’s a bit of a bitter pill since you know you’re waiting four years to get the taste out of your mouth with another album. Take that and compare it to bands like Radiohead that release new material every two years or so.
Fincher’s been working at a pretty fast clip lately. I can handle him pausing to make something commercial.
Now Terrence Malick on the other hand…
I saw the film last night at the press screening. I’ll continue reading when I’m done crafting my review – but I have to agree with Kurt and a lot of his sentiments.
I already disagree, but I look forward to reading your post.
I’m seeing this tonight. Good to see you enjoyed it.
So…..what’d you think?
I found this adaptation much easier to enjoy. And Mara was astounding, simply astounding.
Interesting take – might I ask, why was this one an easier go?
A few more plot points clicked than they did with the Swedish version. That and the assault scenes were easier to tolerate.
This. Is. Bad.
For the second year in a row, I find myself catching the American remake of a beloved swedish film before I see the swedish one. I have serious problems, man.
But, no, I adored this movie. To have Fincher returning to this type of film is a treat. No one does it better than him, that mix of detective procedural, character study, and straight up horror.
And I’m right with you on Mara. She was incredible.
This one’s in my top five of the year, easy!
I have been terrible on commenting around these day so please accept my most humblest of apologies. What I’ll be dropping in the mil for you today should hopefully help to attone.
I wouldn’t say this is bad at all – in each case, you reacted well to the first time you saw the story unspooled, which is why these films get remade because not everybody got to catch the first version. While I dig the Swedish film as much as this remake, I’d rather you got a chance to drown in it on a big screen than try to experience it at home with all the distractions that come along with.
Loved your review, and was *just* about to comment on it when my lunch arrived at the table. I promise i shall get better about all of it soon.
I love that you agree with me on the non necessary comparison with the Swedish one! But if we would be, I watched it again the other day and I thought it was a tad boring, I fell asleep during the second part. The third is the best in the Swedish series.
Glad that you liked this! I thought it was quality as usual from Fincher.
Sorry for the delay in responding Anna…
I’m trying to start something where every film is judged on its own merit, regardless of whether it’s a retelling. Movies used to be remade in Hollywood time and time again, but suddenly we’re averse to them. Glad you like the concept – now pass it on!
As for the original trilogy – which a very good friend gave me on blu-ray for Christmas! – I’m actually quite partial to the first chapter. It slowly became a series of diminishing returns for me.
The subject of Lisbeth Salander came up this week and I can’t get it out of mind. Much earlier this year I saw Finchers’ “Girl” and noticed major differences from the original, so different that I reread the book. Not a single reviewer has caught or mentioned this but Finchers’is the correct version by a mile. Not a small difference, a major one. Larssons’theme is one of justice, justice for Lisbeth and for decades of wrongs against women. Lisbeth 1)brings her sodomizing rapist guardian to bay 2)ends the career of Sweden’s biggest illegal arms-dealing financier and 3)sees Scandinavia’s #1son of a fascist serial killer to a fiery end. At least in Larsson’s and Fincher’s eyes. In the original film Lisbeth is a murderer! This negates Larsson’s central theme, that criminality in the service of Justice is not a crime! Lisbeth Salander is not a vengeance seeking criminal, she is the Minister of Justice! I find it hard to believe reviewers, even Roger Ebert, missed this all important different in the two films!
Sorry, I went on a bit. I know you’re at TIFF. I envy you that this is in your backyard. Have a great time.
Hey Ray – sorry for the late response, but yeah…TIFF and all that came with it.
When I watched the original (which I did before I ever read the book), I never saw Lisbeth as a murderer. When she gets to the crux of the story – the moment where the younger Vanger meets his fate – she is working with Blomkvist to shed light on the deaths of all those missing women. Also, by the time she catches up with him, he’s put Blomkvist into his crosshairs. If we’re to see this version of Salander as commiting homicide (I disagree on that btw), then it must be seen as justifiable homicide in the least.
You’re right though – there are subtle differences between the two films, but I like them both. Like different singers singing the same song.
I’m glad all this talk isn’t a spoiler for anyone. This subject can up in a FMR post about favorite criminals in film and someone suggested Lisbeth Salander. I disagreed! I couldn’t expound on FMR because I know Fogs hasn’t seen the original movie. The difference here isn’t subtle at all! In the Swedish version, Lisbeth strikes the match that’s sets Martin Vanger on fire in his car! When Blomkvist hears this, he breaks his relationship with Lisbeth. Justified or not, he can’t condone murder! This is not in the book or in Finchers’ film. Larsson’s tenet in the Millennium Trilogy is, breaking the law in the service of justice is not a crime! In “Hornet’s Nest” Lisbeth is totally exonerated! Had she committed murder I see a different picture.
Y’know what I take away most from all of this? Remind yourself how many people jump up and down about the necessity of Hollywood remaking foreign films…