Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Hot on the Blog
Raffi Cavoukian
Hina P. Ansari

GET UPDATES FROM Hina P. Ansari
 

Review: The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

Posted: 12/21/11 02:24 PM ET

The epitome of cinematic coolness.

If there is one film that the cool cats were dying to see this season, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo would be it.

The highly anticipated on-screen adaptation of the first of the Swedish trilogy by Stieg Larsson, has undoubtedly captured the imagination of the global litterati.

I am probably one of the last remaining handfuls on the planet that hasn't read any of the Larsson releases (or seen the Swedish cinematic version). Which in my opinion makes me the perfect candidate to judge the film on its own merits, independent of the published counterpart.

I walked in, armed with limited knowledge (outside of the breathless mentions of "You've got to read this book" that followed me all summer), into the dark theatre ready to escape into the brillant directorial brain of David Fincher. I knew that out of all the directors to tackle this herculean book-to-screen project, Fincher (Fight Club, The Social Network) has the capability of doing just that, coded in his DNA.

And I wasn't disappointed. Far from it.

As a cinephile, the opening credits are just as important to me as the plotline. In my visual world, it's the proverbial business card, the first impression -- the landing page of the cinematic world if you will.

As soon as the darkness enveloped the hall, the intense futuristic and incredibly edited opening sequence of credits was a feast for the senses. With Oscar and Grammy award-winning duo Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross's spectacular, soul-shattering rendition of Led Zeppelin's "Immigrant Song," the die was cast. My senses were elated and craved more. Much more.

The film follows journalist Mikael Blomkvist played by the brooding Daniel Craig, who after a career downfall gets hired by a retired Swedish industrialist Henrik Vanger (played by the scene-chewing thespian, Christopher Plummer) to help solve the 40-year-old mystery of his grand-daughter's murder.

Blomkvist disguises this mission to the rest of the extended family members, who all reside on the same estate in their respective expansive mansions, as just another journalist working on the family patriarch's biography. He quickly realizes the unending layers of dysfunctionality, mistrust and mysteriousness that has shrouded the family for what seems like generations. Needing assistance in what seems like a bigger case than what he bargained for (a bargain which would affect his own sullied journalist reputation), he hires Lisbeth Salander (played by Rooney Mara), who herself is a pierced and tattooed outsider dangerously floating just below the radar of humanity. Her steely personality, superbly rough-around-the-edges social skills and jarring gaze hide the fact that she is also a force to be reckoned with, armed with her tunnel vision-like focus, photographic memory and, of course, an investigator's dream, uber-computer hacking prowess.

The film's art direction is sublime. Effortlessly capturing the sleek, unpolluted and uncluttered world of Sweden. It's a world of clean lines and cold winters, which makes you want to reach for your mink throw.

Mara embodies the most buzzed-about cinematic character in the most brazen and brilliant way, proving her salt as the modern-day thespian chameleon. To fully appreciate her depth of transition, it must be noted she also played the preppy Ivy-League student who just couldn't deal with the socially inept Zukerberg in Fincher's Oscar winner The Social Network. My point exactly. It's the same girl.

She embraces the shattered-yet-solid soul that relies on her primal instincts -- to basically survive. Mara's acting doesn't reside in her expressions but much deeper. It's beyond the reserves of her soul. She slithers like her tattooed counterpart. Her heart-stopping gaze and short rough responses leaves the recipient just a little less of a person, after the fact.

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is filled with familiar faces of big screen and small. Legendary actors (the ever-yummy Julian Sands plays the younger Henrik in the film's various flashbacks), is a delightful surprise to see and Robin Wright plays the editor of the independent magazine for which Blomkvist wrote the litigious story thus landing him in hot water.

However it's refreshing to see that the collective roster of the players weren't cherry picked from the limited and overly relied upon Hollywood Rolodex.

Fincher manages to capture the essence of the story through and through. As many on-screen adaptations of literary works unfortunately fall victim to the apples to oranges comparison, I'm confident The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo won't be one of them.

This film beautifully possesses a soul that is gritty, unreserved and raw. Much like the dragon emblazoned lead.

 

Follow Hina P. Ansari on Twitter: www.twitter.com/hinapansari

The epitome of cinematic coolness. If there is one film that the cool cats were dying to see this season, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo would be it. The highly anticipated on-screen adaptation o...
The epitome of cinematic coolness. If there is one film that the cool cats were dying to see this season, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo would be it. The highly anticipated on-screen adaptation o...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 27
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
02:03 PM on 12/27/2011
Saw it yesterday and LOVED it. I had exactly the opposite reaction to the opening credit sequence though. It made me afraid the movie would be so trendy and stylistic that it would not stick to the plot or make sense. (a la Meloncholia - which is at the very top of my worst movie seen this year list) That was wrong though as Dragon Tatoo is very well paced and does a great job explaining things for those who have not read the books. Performances of Craig and Mara are great. I dreaded Craig because I did not like his James Bond turn and thought he was all wrong for Mikeal. Wrong - he was perfect. I also disagree with those who say the Swedish actress was better as Lisbeth. I though Mara nailed it better. She had the right mix of feminity, yet also androgeny, and toughness, yet vulnerability too. Great movie.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Film Shark
I love cinema.
01:40 PM on 12/27/2011
The Swedish version was good, don't get me wrong, but it was originally made for television. The latest U.S. version, is excellent and I don't particularly like remakes. Rooney Mara embodies Lisbeth Salander. Why can't more than one actress be praised for an iconic character? Look at how many James Bonds there have been over the years but people still flock to the theatres to see the latest Bond film.
12:05 PM on 12/27/2011
I saw the Swedish version and I am telling you now as an English first-language speaking non-American, Noomi Rapace's performance is immortal and cannot be beaten. She IS Lisbeth Salander. I understand the argument about American versions but what most Americans fail 2 grasp, is that the American Hollywoodified version is usually the poorer one, and no amount of jingoism can alter that.
07:32 AM on 12/27/2011
There's nothing wrong with film remakes in a different language, but in this case the fake Swedish accent approach, which Daniel Craig commendably avoids, can truly backfire. Apart from unintentional hilarity, it also makes characters sound verbally, and intellectually, challenged when they are supposed to be portrayed communicating fluently in their own linguistic environment. Some say it's cultural imperialism; I think it's just plain silly.
If the English spoken in the film is supposed to represent the (Swedish) characters' own fluent language, and Swedish is not used for obvious reasons, the only solution should be to use English with similar fluency. This can certainly include accents from within the vast English-speaking domain, but not someone's less-than-brilliant idea of how Swedes speak English to convey the idea of film characters speaking their mother tongue.
"My name is Yon Yonson, I come from Wisconsin, I work in a lumber yard there.... and so does my sister Lisbeth."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
syds180turn
Independent and Proud of It!
09:38 PM on 12/26/2011
I think the disconnect here with this film in contrast to the Swedish versions is somewhat territorial. Most Americans think that the American version is better simply because it was made for American audiences. But those who have read the books...truly understand the content and saw the films with Noomi Rapace will see that the American version is just that...American. It's not necessarily better, it's just visually palatable for American audiences. I have seen it numerous times with Americans critiquing foreign remakes and it's the same mindset every time...the American version was better, even if it's not. The American version is more insightful even though it's not...the American version this and the American version that and what it really comes down to is taste. Americans are notorious for not particularly liking many foreign films and that sort influences their opinions on remakes. I think that American audiences go in thinking automatically that it's going to a better film and that's what they stick to. Personally, I think that this film fell short in many ways however I'm not saying it was the worse remake I've ever seen but Fincher's version just didn't move me.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:25 PM on 12/26/2011
"As a cinephile, the opening credits are just as important to me as the plotline."

As soon as I read this sentence I knew I'd need to take the whole review with a substantial grain of salt. I've never heard anyone claiming to be a "cinephile" suggest a 2 or 3 minute contrived afterthought sequence at the start existing only to flash the names of the cast and crew could in any way be of equal importance to the actual story of the film itself. Who really thinks this way?!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BebeLush
The Tao of Pooh
09:42 AM on 12/27/2011
Merely a reflection of what's to come. If the opening credits blow you away, the film probably will too. Although I do wish Fincher hadn't started this trend. It works with his films, not so much with other films.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:02 PM on 12/27/2011
"If the opening credits blow you away, the film probably will too."

But there is no corrollary between the two. There are plenty of films that have "blown me away" which didn't have opening credit sequences at all, or, like every Woody Allen film, simply had white words over a black screen. And then there have been impressive credits - created by a contracted visual design company, not the director - that are stunning and yet the film is terrible.

You probably have those James Bond films to thank - or perhaps even earlier in films like Spartacus - for elaborate opening credits, not David Fincher by the way.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FCBarca
Anther wrld is not only pssible, she is on her way
06:34 AM on 12/26/2011
See the original, Hina...Not sure you'll maintain your viewpoint once you do
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
shadenelkhatib
12:33 PM on 12/27/2011
Agreed! You can't say how wonderful it is without seeing the original and reading the book which I think is even more intense.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tangelan
You will not cast aspersions on my asparagus.
12:51 AM on 12/26/2011
It's refreshing to hear from someone who hasn't seen the Swedish movies or read the books. I'm seeing this movie tomorrow and I have seen the Swedish movies. I did not enjoy them. Watered down story, period (the subtitles had nothing to do with it). I know books don't always translate well to the big screen but it's still disappointing. I'm looking forward to seeing this.
09:51 PM on 12/25/2011
Ah, but if you see Noomi Rapace's version of the Swedish film, you will likely feel that Rooney Mara is trying, but not succeeding to embody the true Lisbeth Salander from the books.

I've seen the trailers and Mara doesn't live up to the high standard set by Rapace. I don't plan on seeing it.
11:46 AM on 12/26/2011
It really isn't fair of you to judge a performance by what is in the trailers.

Now I have not read the books and I have seen the Swedish Girl/Dragon. It was very well done, but it was so well done and some of the plot points so dark, it left me with no desire to revisit the story, not even to re-watch the Swedish version, so I too don't plan on seeing the US version.

Others here are saying that Ms Ansari's review would be different if she had or hadn't done this or that.

Well, yes, but, so? This is her review based on the experiences she takes into the movie and how the movie does or doesn't satisfy her interests as a viewer and a creator.

There's no denying that Lisbeth is a great character and the story is good. Given his talent and the strong raw materials, I have no doubt that Ms Ansari is spot on in reporting that Fincher executed well.
12:10 PM on 12/27/2011
I also have no intention of seeing the Hollywood version simply because Rapace was so brilliant in the film and I am reluctant to have the character of Lisbeth sullied by a watered down Hollywood version. Rapace's performance blew my mind. Especially in the first film. I dont think Hollywood has the stomach to equal the Swedish version. Hollywood is about glitz and bling. Raw, human and gritty doesnt even translate in Hollywood.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:25 PM on 12/25/2011
it's bombing at the Box Office.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tangelan
You will not cast aspersions on my asparagus.
12:55 AM on 12/26/2011
Mission Impossible and Sherlock Holmes also opened this weekend.
12:13 PM on 12/26/2011
It seems to be underperforming.

As the Swedish version has been available on DVD, digital download, and – at least when I saw it – on Netflix, I wonder if we are seeing where digital distribution is presenting a different sort of challenge to big studio business models.

The US remake is not a new phenomenon and sometimes it goes very well (Seven Samurai - Ride of the Magnificent Seven) and sometimes it goes poorly (1980s remakes of French comedies). But, with a rapid remake, I imagine the studios would be hoping for a large segment of the movie-going public not having just watched the original, as story freshness is what helps sell tickets.

New to a lot of people was true when foreign films were found in art-houses and back shelves of the video store. This movie foreign version was featured for weeks at iTunes. Add that it came out when other high-profile and franchise movies were released and I can see that as the movie-going choices are made, the "newer" movies will have an advantage.

For this particular movie, I would not use box office as the invalidator of a good review. If it comes out at a different time of year besides summer and Christmas, perhaps it does really well and it does so for the quality of the filmmaking.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:23 PM on 12/26/2011
it would appear that you have a powerful point.
09:08 PM on 12/24/2011
The books are a must-read and the foreign films (All 3) are also a must-see as they are true to the books, the story, and the characters. This blockbuster cast and redo of a classic is tame. You should see the original instead of hyping what a great job everyone did. Hollywood should stay with original film-making and stop redoing/remaking work done by foreign film-makers. Let the Right One In is another example. The foreign one rocked and the US died at the box office and was lame. People should get over themselves, learn to read subtitles and rediscover independent films and foreign films.
01:53 AM on 12/25/2011
You're right, "people should get over themselves." Except it is the people with their noses in the air constantly whining about how the Swedish adaptation was the best movie ever made in the history of the universe and how anyone that didn't like it is a lazy American who doesn't want to watch foreign films or subtitles. I saw the Swedish film and was less than impressed (and no, it wasn't because it was subtitled). It was because the casting was not good and the film was watered down and did not capture what I imagined in the books. And by the way, the Swedish film was not an "original" work by foreign filmmakers. It was based on a book. Fincher did not remake the Swedish version, he presented a different adaptation of the book, and he did a great job.

Why can't there be two versions? No one is taking away your beloved Swedish adaptation. If you loved the books so much, you should really give the American version a chance and develop your own opinion based on the movie. It follows the book more closely and does a better job with character development. Maybe it will surprise you. In any event, all you have to lose is 2 hours watching a story that you love so much.
01:55 AM on 12/25/2011
Adding on to my previous comment:

You say: "You should see the original instead of hyping on what a great job everyone did." The point of this review is that she HADN"T, and therefore was going in with an open mind, unlike yourself. She is forming her own opinion of the movie based on the merits of the movie, not automatically discounting it because of some weird obsession with the Swedish movie.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
doctorkosan
PhD Chem E, HBS
12:26 PM on 12/25/2011
That is not a persuasive argument. Did you read the books in the original Swedish?
Because if not , well you know the rest of your argument.