The
Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2009, Niels Arden Opley)
Here
we are again, for the second time in a single week, discussing The
Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. This time it is the original Swedish
version, which erupted onto the cinematic landscape only two years
ago, in 2009. Its rise to fame was stratospheric, with film goers
embracing its pulpy nature and the titular girl with the dragon
tattoo, one of the more unique characters to inhabit a mainstream
picture in some time. In fact, Montréal received the film a little
bit before everybody else in North America (although why is a good
question). If remember serves me correctly, it was an early summer
release in '09 under the title Millenium, and the local press
was quite adamant this was the movie event of the year. The strangest
part is that the film came out again under the title The Girl with
the Dragon Tattoo. If one steps into an HMV store in
Montréal, one can buy a Blu-ray of Millenium and The Girl
with the Dragon Tattoo even though they are one and the same
film.
Neither
the plots of the American or Swedish cinematic translations differ
much from the novel, and given that it was only a few days ago that
Between the Seats reviewed the David Fincher interpretation, this
review shall not invest much effort in providing a synopsis, other
than stating that the movie centres around a murder mystery. Henrik
Vanger (Sven-Bertil Taube), once the CEO of Sweden's most powerful
manufacturing corporation, hires disgraced Millenium journalist
Mikael Blomkvist (Michael Nyqvist) to investigate the possible murder
of his niece, which happened 40 years earlier. The elderly man
suspects someone in his family to be the culprit. Eventually the
protagonist calls upon the help of one Lisbeth Salander (Noomi
Rapace), who is unfriendly, lacks any sort of social skills, dresses
like a goth punk, but possess truly phenomenal investigative and
computer hacking skills.
Niels
Arden Opley's version of the Stieg Larsson story owes the vast
majority of its redeemable qualities to the actress whose name has
been on everybody's lips for the past two years: Noomi Rapace. It is
thanks to the talented Rapace that a character like Lisbeth who,
under almost any other circumstances, would be absolutely detestable,
proves to be the most enjoyable person on screen and by quite a fair
margin at that. To genuinely make that character worthy of the
viewer's interest and time could not have been an easy feat, for she
has to balance out sprinkles of humanity with the many qualities
which have earned her such notoriety. She is the nightmarish version
of Sherlock Holmes, if you will. Whereas Rooney Mara, who plays the
role in Fincher's film (very, very well, mind you) embraced the
totally psychotic possible version of Lisbeth, Rapace succeeds at
balancing her out ever so slightly. She does look weird and she does
behave weirdly, that much is true. Despite this, the finer details of
Rapace's performance, from subtle glances, to the way she turns her head
when something affects her, to her more regular manner of speaking
(Mara mostly talks in standoffish manner throughout her film,
although again, in a good sense), all of it creates a more humanized
version of the Lisbeth character, someone who feels a little more
balanced. It could be safe to wager that mainstream audiences will
feel more 'comfortable' with the Noomi Rapace interpretation than the
Mara interpretation. This is by no means a slight against Rapace.
Rather, it speaks to her strengths as an actress to play on all the
counterbalancing aspects that make Lisbeth who she is.
Truth
be told, Noomi Rapace's presence is so strong in this picture that
provides virtually all of her scenes with a much needed lift,
especially those involving her co-star, Michael Nyqvist. The latter
is by no means a poor actor. He is doing what it appears the script
is asking of his character, but therein lie two critical issues. The
first is that the script has nothing interesting to say about
Michael, even though at the outset of his journey he is a man who
finds himself in the most difficult of situations, professionally
speaking. Everything about a journalist hinges on his or her
reputation and dependability. The film puts a decent amount of
emphasis on that notion, in addition to teasing the audience with the
possibility that Michael might have been framed. Such promise of
terrific development is never fulfilled, with script never giving
the viewer much to feed off of. The second issue at hand is that the
actor, Michael Nyqvist, is himself unable to bring anything to the
table. If he just has to sit at a lit table and read off his computer
screen, then that is what Nyqvist does. If he is called upon to stare
at a picture of the murder victim and ask aloud to himself in a
shushed tone: 'What happened to you?...' that is what he does.
Nyqvist is not the sort of actor who can elevate pedestrian material.
It might be an unfair assessment because he is caught between a rock
and a hard place. He is not, ultimately, the star of the show and the
script really does not give him much to do, but somewhere in the
middle the actor must (and the word must is stressed here)
find something, anything, to work with. He appears a bit livelier
when paired with Rapace, thankfully, yet the latter totally out acts
the former.
Watching
this Swedish version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, it
became clear by the midway point that is was content, much like the
recent English language version, to stuff in as much material as it
could. The film lacks rhythm, even more so than its American
counterpart. This is definitely a case where the story is merely
going through the motions, from one scene to the next because clue A
leads to clue B which leads to clue C and so on. Moments of
understanding and discovery feel very perfunctory, something any
murder mystery should avoid at all costs. Perhaps the only moment
that carried serious weight, plot and theme-wise, was when Lisbeth
chases after the killer, now known to her and Mikael, and, having
cornered that person, is faced with a very personal dilemma as to
what to do. A great moment, a very well directed moment, but such
instances are infrequent. A bland version of the story, overall.
Reading
the novel, it felt apparent what some of the book's deficiencies
were. It concerned itself with far too many subplots and failed to
make them all feel equally important. Still, a lot of material
existed to make a solid mystery thriller., provided adequate
adjustments were made. Does this Niels Arden Opley directed attempt
fail on all accounts? No, but nor is it especially memorable either. It is
the type of film perfect for the conditions under which this reviewer
watched it: nothing to do and lots of time to kill prior to an
important engagement later that day. The story is serviceable,
nothing more. If one is absolutely intent on catching it either
before or after discovering the new English-language version, the
highest endorsement the film can receive is its extraordinary female
lead, both the character and the actress. If she plays her cards
smartly, Noomi Rapace will have a great career.
No comments:
Post a Comment