“The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo”

Hey kids, looks like I’m going to snake in one more before the new year after all.  I always wind up seeing about a dozen movies right around Christmastime, so let’s get down to business.

I’ve been especially excited about The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (hereinafter, “Tattoo”) ever since I saw the Swedish original earlier this year, and then learned of an American remake on the way.  I have (regrettably) not yet read the book this movie is based on, but I hope that it is just as good, if not better than, the films.

Having seen the original, I was fully prepared to delve into a lengthy analysis of what I assumed would be glaring differences between the two.  The differences, however, are all at once expected and inconsequential.  Director David Fincher and his cast and crew have created a remake with no shameless alterations of the original.  This movie was shot in Sweden, which meant signs, names, places, etc. were all in Swedish rather than English.  The cast was heavily populated by Swedes, though the central characters were played predominantly by Brits or Americans, as is the custom in these sorts of remakes, and regardless, the casting was spot on.  This all allowed for a superior level of immersion into the film, while none of these details ever became distracting or even noticeable.

The story too remained largely unaltered from the original film.  Taut and suspenseful, full of dark moments and even darker plot twists, Tattoo pulls you into the lives of its two downtrodden protagonists quickly and easily.  Since the film lacks few major points of contrast with its slightly older cousin, much of what I’m about to say applies to both versions.  Daniel Craig plays Mikael Blomkvist, a disgraced journalist under threat of indictment for accusations of libel.  In the midst of a media and legal firestorm, Blomkvist is contacted and subsequently hired by Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer), a millionaire industrialist obsessed with finding his niece who disappeared forty years ago.  Simultaneously, we are introduced to Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara), a misanthropic computer hacker who was initially responsible for bringing Blomkvist to the attention of Vanger in order to make a quick (slightly illegal) buck.

I have to say that Daniel Craig does an even better job than the original’s Michael Nyqvist in playing the disgraced journalist.  Craig conveys Blomkvist’s deep pessimism about his situation, but once Vanger makes his enticing overtures we see a light flicker back to life behind Blomkvist’s naturally inquisitive eyes that stays there for the rest of the film, even when his situation becomes bleak and life-threatening.

Salander, arguably a more nuanced character, is played by Mara with the same determination and fire as the original’s Noomi Rapace.  The complexities of the character might have been easily lost with an imperfect casting, but Mara is just as suited to the role as Rapace.  Salander comes off as almost pathologically single-minded, cold and abrasive, but only because her world has been controlled by people unsympathetic to her plight and unwilling to trust her simply because she’s a little different.

One of the things that does differentiate this film from the original is the way Fincher and co. lightning cut between the two characters’ lives, tracking Blomkvist’s investigation of the reclusive Vanger family and their ties to a series of brutal killings, and then quickly splicing in bits from Salander’s life where she has become the target of her state-appointed guardian, a sexual predator who brutally rapes her when she asks him to unfreeze her bank account.  Fincher moves in closer at times we would rather he pull away from the action, and the music by Trent Reznor makes your skin crawl at all the right moments, its visceral strains making you feel the most during the scenes of greatest intensity.

Tattoo, in all its versions, excels at pulling the viewer into its world, telling the tale of two ordinary people who find themselves in bizarre and extraordinary situations that demand decisive action.  It’s rewarding when Salander eventually bests her tormenting guardian – despite using his own despicable methods against him – and it’s satisfying to see an unconventional heroine topple a predator using both wits and brute strength.  Equally satisfying to watch is Blomkvist slowly making revelations about the Vanger family in true detective-story format, rather than becoming a celluloid stereotype shouting and kicking down the doors of people withholding information.  Later in the film, Fincher ratchets up the tension as Salander and Blomkvist finally meet, Blomkvist asking her to become his assistant for the rest of his investigation.  Salander puts her computer skills to work to connect the last few dots of the case, but cannot inform Blomkvist of the truth until he has already been confronted by the murderer they’ve been tracking all along.

The climax of the film is understandably gut-wrenching, the entire movie having brought us to a point where violence and depravity are expected, all the while being uniquely blended into the larger mood of the tale.  It’s a noir made the way all noirs should be made: uncompromising, brutal, but ultimately more uplifting than depressing.  This is why Tattoo is such a good story; it’s not for the faint of heart, but it’s a rewarding experience if you can make it through the other side, as both Salander and Blomkvist do when they find their circumstances markedly improved by the end, despite – and because of – the grisly paths that brought them there.

Single Post Navigation

← Older Entry

Newer Entry →