"Quit it with the AC Slater stuff. Don't you respect chairs?"
I haven’t read the Stieg Larsson books or seen the Swedish-language film adaptations, so you’ll get no comparisons here (GOD, I’M SO IGNORANT!), but as rendered by David Fincher, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is basically an above-average murder mystery with a sloppy ending, mostly unnoteworthy — but for one thing: Lisbeth Salander, who, as a character, is damn near groundbreaking, and no, dummy, it’s not because she dresses like suicide girl Barbie. With Salander, Fincher/Larsson do right by “strong female heroin” in a way that movies have been f*cking up for probably 100 years. Then they totally screw it up again, but we’ll get to that later.
Daniel Craig plays Mikael Blomkvist, a recently-disgraced journalist (loser of a high-profile libel suit by a wealthy industrialist) who gets hired by another wealthy industrialist, this one retired, played by Christopher Plummer, to investigate a decades-old murder. Plummer comes from a family of kooky ex-Nazis (Stieg Larsson was himself a journalist who investigated right-wing extremists), almost all of whom still live on a sleepy island in the north of Sweden (with shades of Wicker Man, Insomnia). Plummer wants Craig to find out how his niece disappeared into thin air one day at a family reunion back in the 60s. In exchange, Plummer promises to provide Craig some dirt on the industrialist who disgraced him. Rooney Mara’s Lisbeth Salander, a bisexual, antisocial ward of the state with a photographic memory, works with a firm of investigators. She comes into the picture first as the operative who does the background check on Craig for Plummer, but soon she and Craig find themselves working together on the murder. OOH, DOES ANYONE ELSE SMELL AN UNLIKELY PARTNERSHIP? I’ll be your Danny Glover. Just let me get my merkin.
Family secrets! Wealthy benefactors! Taunting serial killers! Political intrigue! It’s basic stuff, but mostly well done. The first two-thirds of the film have that deliberate, non-gimmicky, slow-build pacing of Zodiac, probably Fincher’s most solid film (Fight Club was ten times more provocative, but it also had a disappointing, semi-nonsensical ending). It’s a hard-boiled mystery, well-told, with a solid ensemble cast. At least until the end, when the bad guy turns out to be a half-assed, mostly motiveless, token evil white guy straight out of a Law and Order episode. GRRR, I’M A WHITE PATRIARCHAL OLIGARCH, THE ONLY THING THAT GETS ME HARD IS OPPRESSING THE DOWNTRODDEN! If Dragon Tatoo doesn’t shit the bed at the end, it at least farts it up pretty bad. The last third is almost a total disappointment, without even taking into account how badly you’ll probably have to pee by then, considering the almost two hour and forty minute running time.
But let’s be honest, we wouldn’t be talking about it, and it wouldn’t have sold 27 million books and spawned two separate film franchises if it was just an above-average murder mystery. Basic cable is lousy with those. It’s the Salander character that sets it apart. Because finally, there’s a female hero who isn’t just a male hero in disguise, indistinguishable but for a bow slapped on her head like Ms. Pacman. The female protagonists we’re used to seeing in movies like Colombiana, Hanna, Salt, etc. (to limit it just to a few that came out in the last year or two) are just traditional male protagonists with the gender swapped (Salt was even originally written for a dude, and was made with few changes). They overcome obstacles the way male heroes would, with fistfights and parkour. Aside from the fact that watching a 100-pound girl beat up 200-pound henchmen just isn’t believable, it isn’t that satisfying to watch a chick beat dudes by out-duding them. It’d be like the Allies defeating the Axis by being better at Fascism. The old “girls can do anything boys can do” narrative is fundamentally flawed because it assumes girls want to do everything boys do. It basically starts with an expectation of inferiority, and refutes it in a token, anecdotal way. Tattoos and piercings and silly suicide girl anti-establishment clichés aside, Salander is at least a lot more cleverly written than the usual ass-kicking skank in tights. (Freudians could read some strap-on imagery into Salander’s use of a dildo as a weapon and her choice of a speedy, phallic motorcycle, but I’m going to call it coincidence). She’s rare and transcendent in that she spends the entire film as someone who doesn’t seek or require validation from men (or anyone, for that matter).
All that would be great, but it also makes final scene that much more unfortunate. SPOILER BREAK! LEAVE NOW OR FOREVER HOLD YOUR PIECE!
—
–
-
The final scene basically takes everything that was compelling and different about the Salander character, crumples it up, and takes a dump on its merkin. After an overreaching sequence (a glossed-over heist-ish scene that’s sort of the opposite of the grounded, slow-build first and second act) in which Salander uses her computer-hacking $killz to come into a great deal of money, she uses her cash to buy Daniel Craig’s character (whom she matter-of-factly seduced a few scenes earlier in one of the film’s best sequences) a fancy jacket. But, when she takes it to him for the expected happy reunion scene, she sees him back with his old girlfriend. She chucks the jacket in a dumpster in a huff, and rides off on her motorcycle. Fin. Uhhh… was that supposed to be empowering? How do you take a character whom you took great pains to build into this independent, empowering hero in the first two acts and turn her into just another woman scorned? It destroys everything you’ve built. They build Salander into this hard luck case who refused to be a victim and sought sexual satisfaction in an unconventional, unapologetic way, but the way they end it, it turns out she’s really just a simple reactionary, falling for the first dude who isn’t a total dick to her (which is also wildly far-fetched, given this girl’s history, but that’s another story). All of that and it turns out she’s just a victim after all? The usual wounded-dove bullshit? What a disappointment. The enduring impression of Dragon Tattoo is of film that hints promisingly at being something special, but ultimately settles for being mostly mundane.
GRADE: B
![[avatar]](http://p.uproxxcdn.com/photo/257/thumb)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/Leonardo-DiGatsbyo-Cigar-dog-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/Iron-Man-3-Robert-Downey-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/04/Tom-Cruise-Fish-Face-gif-150x150.gif)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/04/Trance-movie-150x150.jpg)
Strong female heroin killed my Christmas hooker.
Predators was cool because the female badass was good at snipering, which is plausible for a woman. You may have mentioned that on the frotcast but fuck you.
/I smell an unlikely partnership–bourbon and Capri Sun.
You have to read the book(s). It’s not exactly as straightforward as it seems. The story somewhat defies movie makers to include some inner monologue.
That can’t be a response to critical analysis of a film. The film is supposed to act independently of the book (as far as analysis is concerned). If the response to the movie is “you have to read the book(s) to get it” than the film failed to properly adapt and convey the book in the new medium its being presented in.
Stevie just went all Film Studies on your ass.
Dave: so the ending’s not completely out-of-character for her as far as the books are concerned? All I have to go by is the original trilogy and the Fincher remake.
Pretty much. I think her endearment for Blomkvist is a little more subtle in the book (no jacket). But her girlish, coy contempt for Blomkvist is really ham-fisted in the next two books.
I read the books and I remember feeling the same way at the ending of the book. Especially given the free spirited character of Salander. I half expected her to join in with the couple.
The relationship break turns out to be an important plot element in the next book, however.
/wanking joke
Deep down the bitch wants to be normal and in book 1 she thinks she can be. the end of that book with the blomkvist / girlfriend stuff is basically taking a big dump on that. from there on out she just embraces her inner freak.
Reviews like this are the reason I keep coming back. That and rape jokes.
Watched the first films, my Gf read the books – general consensus in our house re: Fincher’s version.
1.) Characters were a closer to the book’s
2.) Mara did a great job, Craig was fine.
3.) Ending had me at first thinking similar to the the reviewer, but after talking it through, decided it fits her character, and who’s to say that a post-feminist strong female lead can’t also have a soft spot, especially for those rare people in her life that give her a fair shake (see also her disabled caretaker.)
really the only thing about this version i thought felt wrong were the titles – what was that nonsense all about?
Lisbeth definitely makes the series. I can even forgive her appearance, since it’s less a middle finger to society and more genuine apathy. Lisbeth ain’t care.
It does bother me
(LIGHT SPOILERS!)
that Lisbeth spends the rest of the series lugging around a torch for Blomkvist, especially since he’s a pretty unapologetic manwhore. At the very least, they spend most of the last two novels apart, and Lisbeth spends more time doing stuff than pining over Blomkvist.
It’s not perfect but, like you said, at least Larsson was trying to write a female character who isn’t a big ol’ pile of Michelle Rodriguez-esque tough girl cliches.
Agreed, the title sequence was dumb and out of place. It was like a bad James Bond + S&M intro.
I’m not paying any attention to this until they change her name to Lillybeth Salamander and make her dress up like a cowboy.
Stieg Larsson was one of those Godwin’s Law guys, who saw Nazism in everything.
i.e. Some people believe in racial blood purity, eugenics, and genocide, and murder foreigners who attempt to immigrate to their Nordic paradise… So, they must be Nazis, right? It’s obvious, isn’t it?
Reducto ad Hitlerum. Hitler liked dogs, too…
Your second to last paragraph was so insightful it just made my intellectual gender studies boner explode.
And it’s messy. Very, very messy.
“Unapologetic Manwhore” was the name of my hair metal band in college.
The final scene is not supposed to make Salander empowering. Throughout the movie, she is able to become closer and closer to someone – a man, no less – and in her mind, since she is capable of change, so then is the only man with whom she has ever had strong feelings for. Salander KNOWS Blomkvist’s history with his girlfriend, and she knows all about his exploits as a man-whore. She is not angry at him, and she is not trying to prove any point by running away – she is sad because, even though she is finally open to someone emotionally, they are not emotionally available to her, which is the complete opposite of every other man in her life (with the exception of the man that rapes her.) Everything in her life comes slowly slowly slowly, which is why in the third act, it is not the slow-build we are used to from not only the movie, but her character. Nowhere is it implied that she is the type of person who would steal millions from someone, she is clearly doing it for the sake of Blomkvist with her own personal gain as a perk. This is why it all happens so fast, she changes so quickly and so much, when she is finally able to accept it, the man she is changing for is not willing (or able) to accept her. So she does the only thing she knows how to do, she shuts down and runs away. I thought all of that was made pretty clear.
Agree. Not sure why Vince and some of the commenters think that the ending was untrue to her character. I thought that the relationship between the two was developed very well and I certainly thought that she was capable of becoming vulnerable toward the end, only to get her heart broken. She was a 3 dimensional character. And every 3 dimensional character can change in any way.
I liked the movie very much and enjoyed the books thoroughly–they’re great page turners but, unlike the Dan Brown books, you don’t want to cockpunch the author when you get to the end. The amount of wish fulfillment in the main character is awesome though–real-life reporter creates fictional reporter who is heroic and gets to finger all the ladies. It would be like Vince creating a blogger character who bathes regularly, has a clean couch and gets to finger all the ladies.
Wait, that isnt the life of a blogger? Someone lied to me.
I’ve never read the books but I actually held one in an airport in Sweden. I’m not going to lie. It was pretty heavy.
COTW.
For anyone who is saying the credits were stupid or out of place, I went and saw this with 2 avid fans of the books and Swedish films. I have read or seen neither. Their favorite part of the movie was the credits, because, as they explained to me, it sets up the second movie perfectly. I of course have no idea what they were talking about, and just thought it was badass looking and had a great cover behind it.
No wonder why more and more sexy girls guys join the largest Std dating site stdster. com to look for sex partner.
COTW
Fincher originally wanted Plummer’s character to run a secret cabal codenamed P.A.G.A.N. that tries to kill of Salander’s character using his top hit-man, Amol Muzz.
Geez Fart, a Dragnet reference. Respect? Respect.
Vince, can you really say “tattoos and piercings and silly suicide girl anti-establishment clichés aside” when you are talking about Salander? I think it’s too central to what her character is or is supposed to be. IMHO, the “suicide girl anti-establishment cliche” side of her character is (or at least is presented as) the reason why she doesn’t “seek or require validation from men (or anyone, for that matter),” especially the “require” part. So, since the i-n-d-e-p-e-n-d-e-n-t side of her character is driven by a cliche, I disagree it makes her “rare and transcendant.” I guess to be precise I would say I disagree that it makes her transcendant. You see a good merkin shot about as often as you see a good Terrence Malick movie. (coincidence?)
So how was the butt rape? I need to know about the butt rape.
First, she showed up and then they started to wrestle like on TV, and then he put her on the bed, I guess because she was sleepy, and then he got on top of her and said something but he had a funny voice so I didn’t understand it, and then I think he thought she was a rocking horse, because he was going back and forth, and she didn’t really like it (I think because she didn’t like being mistaken for a rocking horse) and then later she limped home and she took a shower, and she had some toast earlier and dropped some in her lap because there was strawberry jelly going down the drain, and she didn’t seem very happy, but later she gave him a hot-dog shaped present so I guess they’re friends again? I don’t know. The movie was very confusing.
Don’t forget he tosses or salad! Or at least portrays tossing her salad pretty convincingly for prude Hollywood actors. Mmmmm, tastes like swedish meatballs!
A chick who kicks a dildo up guy’s ass is usually the last person you expect to be a reactionary.
Considering this was a murder mystery Fincher probably shouldn’t have cast Stellan Skarsgard as one of the suspects….
So true. The second he came on screen I knew it was him.
*SPOILERS*
/did I do it right?
I noticed it the first time he came on screen, but that was only because he screamed “I DID IT” as he ejaculated.
Fuck Enya, we get shit done to Stealers Wheel here in the states
Holy fucksauce, two minutes after I read this comment “Stuck in the Middle” came on the radio. I, subsequently, came on the radio.
I’ve read the books, seen the Swedish films and all that and I agree that Fincher ended the movie poorly. It should have ended with Salander making good on draining Wernstrom’s bank accounts and saved the heartbreak for the beginning of the next installation.
This movie is different because our female lead is actually a woman, not a dude with the dick tucked back…or she’s just like every other woman in every other movie. Whatever. Fuck you. You’ll still pay to see it.
One Glover; one Glover at a time
What’s with her eyebrows? The Girl Who Looked Like Edward Scissorhands.
Nice to hear how women should be from a man. Oh wait that’s exactly what you were bitching about. A woman should react better to an emotional betrayal because it fits your idea women are less emotional than men? I know you sleep with guys but have you at least MET a woman before?
The book was written and movie directed by men, but if you want to write your own review between gay jokes, feel free.
if the jacket didn’t have a scorpion on it i don’t really care.
“It’d be like the Allies defeating the Axis by being better at Fascism.”
You mean the Allies that included a totalitarian dictatorship that took over half of Europe after the war and spawned the political turn of the phrase “the Iron Curtain”?
/analogy gestapo’ed
I’m a woman, and I thought the ending tarnished the awesomeness they managed to achieve with Salander, too. I read on Wikipedia that actually happens in the book, though. I wish they left it out or didn’t end on that note. Yes, even tough girls have feelings — but the way they presented it made her look weak and gave Blomkvist the power in the final exchange of the film. The Swedish adaptations are superior in this regard (and most others.)
After I read the book and saw the trailer, all I wanted to know was “Where can I get those clothes?”
Fincher’s film is on target. The ending has only a small change, but Lisbeth being disappointed at the end is straight out of the book. Not bad at all.
Ass-clown, your ass-ment of the ending is quite off based. The entire time Craig and Mara are together on screen she is slowly breaking down her guard. She is in her early 20′s and has been betrayed by men her entire life. My goodness she started to fall for and feel vulnerable towards an older man? That never happens in real life. The way I see it Fincher had two possible endings, she feel for Craig but he let her down (a young woman putting too much stock in a relationship), or she begins a career in porn. I’m guessing the studio execs and author of the original story feel Fincher made the right choice.