Recognizing that no one is going to want to read the elitistacademic dogging on fifty-something films, instead of focusing on the completely self-indulgent opening credits, drawing attention to the cacophony of random extra-Swedish dialects, or even pondering the necessity of this film being made at all, I’m going to say only positive things about The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.
- Daniel Craig looks absolutely amazing in a ¾-length wool trench.
- Robin Wright is pretty, and her indiscernible accent is totally fluid.
- Craig certainly knows his way around a cigarette, which is refreshing because there is nothing worse than someone pretending to smoke who has no first-hand knowledge. [Okay, there is something worse: no liquid in movie prop coffee cups. Note: liquid has weight.]
- Roony Mara had way more piercings than Noomi Rapace.
- Mara’s dragon tattoo is also more dragony.
- Julian Sands as a young Christopher Plummer is totally convincing. The resemblance is unnerving.
- Stellan Skarsgård’s boots in the press conference scene were A-M-A-Z-I-N-G but unfortunately not as cool as these:
- Depicting Libeth as brilliant as she actually is in the novel would have made the movie too much like the book.
- It was a good thing they decided to cut the scene in the Outback, which would have made the ending clear. This way there’s more mystery.
- All edgy, self-aware movies should be almost three hours long and lack narrative integration.
Bonus: Mara’s relationship with Fincher is totally not creepy. Just ask anyone.
Well, I don’t need to be all positive. I really did like it overall, especially the casting of Daniel Craig as Kalle Blomqvist who is spot on, Christopher Plummer, and Stellan Skarsgaard was terrific as Martin (but I always like him).
Now on to the negativity: Why kill off a perfectly lovely cousin and change the story re. uncovering Harriet in Australia, complete with family? I told my sis-in-law that they must have run out of money to complete that part of the plot after that absurdly cool but waaaayy too long oily intro. Self-indulgent is exactly right.
And casting someone 20 years younger than the actual character (Joely Richardson, forever Nip/Tuck train wreck to me) is ridiculous. So she’s the best-preserved 60+ year old ever or does Fincher think the audience is too stupid to do the math? Dumb.
Finally, I hated the casting of the evil social worker Bjurman and that they changed the tattooing she did on his gut. Why?
Okay, finished complaining. I did like it, really! And it was a much better interpretation of a Nordic film than many others I’ve cringed through in the past –Insomnia and The Kingdom being some prime stinkers.
Posted by Michelle | January 22, 2012, 9:14 pmWhy kill off a perfectly lovely cousin, indeed! Agreed, they must have run out of money because that was a whiplash of a wrap-up relative to the near three hours we spent over all. And yes, I want to look as well-preserved at sixty as Ms. Richardson.
Posted by elitistacademic | January 22, 2012, 9:42 pmYou could have stopped at “Daniel Craig looks absolutely amazing.” Yummy, yummy man.
I haven’t read the books, so I don’t have many complaints. I do think the ending was rushed and someone had to explain how Lisbeth donning a wig and flying around the world caused the dude’s death. But maybe I’m just dense.
It was a perfectly acceptable thriller and I look forward to the trilogy’s remaining films.
Posted by michelle | January 23, 2012, 12:31 pm