Directed by:
David FincherScreenplay:
Steven ZaillianCinematography:
Jeff CronenwethCast:
Daniel Craig, Rooney Mara, Christopher Plummer, Stellan Skarsgård, Steven Berkoff, Robin Wright, Yorick van Wageningen, Joely Richardson, Geraldine James (more)VOD (5)
Plots(1)
Forty years ago, Harriet Vanger disappeared from a family gathering on the island owned and inhabited by the powerful Vanger clan. Her body was never found, yet her uncle is convinced it was murder and that the killer is a member of his own tightly knit but dysfunctional family. He employs disgraced financial journalist Mikael Blomkvist and the tattooed, ruthless computer hacker Lisbeth Salander to investigate. When the pair link Harriet’s disappearance to a number of grotesque murders from almost forty years ago, they begin to unravel a dark and appalling family history. But the Vanger’s are a secretive clan, and Blomkvist and Salander are about to find out just how far they are prepared to go to protect themselves. (official distributor synopsis)
(more)Videos (7)
Reviews (14)
A nice mainstream fairy tale. The humor and story work even if haven’t read the book or seen the original trilogy. It wasn’t that long ago that Hollywood found it necessary to update and rewrite Japanese and other horror flicks, but if it's currently fashionable to remake Swedish films, I'm somewhat more sympathetic to that. Lisbeth Salander is a girl that contemporary mass pop culture can't do without, so why not be happy that her series is good? Fincher doesn't always suit my tastes, I don't seek out Craig, and I wouldn't have thought Rooney Mara would be capable of such a personality after the Facebook girl. I'm very fond of Stellan Skarsgård this year and Christopher Plummer is king, but the person who is a downright joy to see on screen is the ethereal being Joely Richardson. I need to see Joely more often, and I'm very much in the mood for a little marathon with the original Lisbeth - and that's exactly the effect the film was supposed to have.
()
David Fincher is one of the best directors alive and it’s not surprising that he’s made an excellent film. The differences between the American and Swedish adaptations are enough to invalidate the argument of a pointless remake, but I’m still unable to convince myself that I should be satisfied with this new version, I’m not, even though the quality is clear. In short, watching a whodunit when you know who the killer is, is as much fun as going to the sea to watch dolphins, even though you know that dolphins don’t live in that sea. You can enjoy the fresh sea breeze, work on a tan, have a cold alcoholic beverage… but you still know that you won’t see any dolphins.
()
If I compare the procedural ritual Zodiac and this sexless genre trap, it's clear that Fincher was doing a studio job. Nordic detectives are not cool. They're really weird. This version was unable to capture this at all. The investigation is secondary here, and what makes it twice as bad given that it’s Fincher - any pathological charge slips away here. The fact that the killer listens to Enya is a weak band-aid. Anal sex in the form in which the film offers it can really outrage only unbroken Catholics, and there were more places where I searched in vain for Fincher's contribution. Personally, I suffered through most of the film - and something tells me that if you don't know the book, some of the things won't make sense (for a detective story, the motivations of the killer and the detective are quite crucial, which are hardly found here).
()
My slight disappointment stems paradoxically from my ignorance of the book, which is obviously not very suitable for filming. This is because the quantity of names becomes annoying after a while, although otherwise, Fincher does great work as usual in all other components, so we do get a great soundtrack (but this time it's too "off the charts" for the Oscar race:)), excellent cinematography (which underlines the pedantic narrative), and precise actors. But I'll definitely go see it again. The fact that the gardener is the murderer will soon dawn on even the slower folks, but that's beside the point. How we get there is the first priority this time. Fincher is the best director alive right now, period.
()
To make an accurate comparison of both the European and North American versions would mean watching both films at once or shortly after each other. I saw the initial adaptation almost two years ago, so I dare not make a categorical conclusion. Nevertheless, the comparison of both versions and their quality is the most interesting aspect of the whole matter. There is a significant difference between European and American blockbuster films. With the overseas version, it is evident that we are operating in a completely different budget category, so the opening credits nail you to your seats with an audiovisual onslaught when you see the impressive transformations of the main characters' bodies in a sea of liquid latex. You appreciate the top-notch camera work and excellent music accompaniment. Whether it was in exteriors or interiors, no expense was spared. The main male role was, presumably, taken on by one of the highest-paid actors of today, who filled the gap between shooting Bond movies. The whole film was overseen by one of the most acclaimed directors of the past two decades. Instead of unknown European actors, you see internationally known faces of Hollywood stars. A film has been created that will likely have an impact on the Oscars and will successfully be distributed worldwide. There are no significant differences in the plot between the American and European versions; both films try to faithfully bring the book version to the screen within the possibilities of their respective runtimes. The American version is perhaps somewhat more commercial; it aims for a universal appeal to audiences from different cultures and countries, so it doesn't allow the viewer to dwell too much on the unspoken - it is more literal. In some places, that is to the detriment of the story. I would certainly not reduce the relationship between Blomkvist and Lisbeth to a purely sexual level, quite the opposite. Even with the generous runtime, it is surprising how little the film delves into the psychology of individual actors, showing their motivation, the demons that lead to a series of crimes, and the moves of the individual adversaries. As I mentioned before, the American version is more ambitious, and likely better made, as there is a difference between Fincher and Oplev, but when I think about it, Oplev's version is more likable to me after all. Let's not beat around the bush, the "Millennium Trilogy" became a hit not because of the character of the investigative journalist - there are dozens of those in books - but because of the edgy punk girl with somewhat sociopathic behavior and exceptional hacking skills. And here, in my eyes, Noomi Rapace clearly leads the way. She has a peculiar charisma, she is unfamiliar, so one can easily identify with her as Lisbeth and root for her. Rooney Mara is a capable actress, but the chemistry between her and me as a viewer simply did not work as it should have. She even seemed a bit unsympathetic to me, which made it hard to root for her. I can think of a few other names that I would have preferred to see in that role. In any case, this film is definitely worth a trip to the movie theater, if only for its excellent soundtrack and professional execution. Only a few blockbusters maintain a level that doesn't offend film connoisseurs, but I have to say that, emotionally, the American version somehow missed the mark for me. I don't need to see this film again. Overall impression: 75%.
()
(less)
(more)
Ads