Skip page navigation
> > Review: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Eric D. Snider

· website | e-mail | twitter

Eric has been a film critic since 1999, and a beard wearer since 2008. He holds a degree in journalism and used to work in "the newspaper industry," back when that was a thing.

Review: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Eric D. Snider December 21, 2011

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
C+

The problem with both movie adaptations of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo — Niels Arden Oplev’s 2009 Swedish version as well as David Fincher’s new American one — is that they believe we are far more interested in Mikael and Lisbeth’s relationship than we actually are. The central mystery is finally solved, after more than two hours, in a thrilling fashion — but instead of ending, the movie returns to the lives and loves of its characters for another 20 minutes, intent on wrapping up loose ends that we weren’t aware existed. I assume this is done out of faithfulness to Stieg Larsson’s novel, and maybe the bond between journalist and computer hacker is more resonant in print. On film it feels very much beside the point, or at least it has both times so far. Maybe the third adaptation of this book, if there is one, will make the pair’s personal connection feel plausible.

When it’s dealing with the crime investigation and Lisbeth’s harrowing ongoing battle with a corrupt social worker, Fincher’s The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo works well enough. It’s a cold, mechanical procedural at heart, which makes a perfectionist like Fincher (Seven, The Social Network) a good choice to direct it. He and veteran screenwriter Steven Zaillian (Moneyball, Schindler’s List) wisely retained the desolate Swedish setting, which not only avoids outraging the book’s fans but is the perfect location anyway for a story about such frigid people.

High-profile Stockholm journalist Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig) has just suffered a public disgracing when he’s recruited by Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer), the head of a wealthy industrialist family, to investigate the 1966 disappearance and presumed murder of his great-niece. The girl, Harriet, was a teenager at the time, and the killer has been taunting Henrik by sending tokens whose meaning only Henrik and the other Vangers could know. Whoever did away with Harriet must be a relative.

There are plenty of suspects, as nearly every member of this venal family is despicable and holds some icy grudge or other against someone else. Many of them live, in separate houses, on a small island near the town of Hedestad, and it is here that Mikael comes to investigate. He pores over the evidence gathered by police 40 years ago, applying a fresh perspective and the mind of a journalist to it, while simultaneously getting away from his professional scandals back in the city.

Meanwhile, only tangentially connected to all of this, there is 23-year-old Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara), a pale, skeletal computer hacker adorned with the kinds of tattoos and piercings that make you afraid of her when you see her on the subway. She makes a living doing thorough (and I mean thorough) background checks on people for clients who are happy to look the other way if she does something illegal like hack into the subject’s email. Her childhood evidently filled with horrific trauma, Lisbeth was a ward of the state in her teen years, and continues to be supervised by government agencies. She no longer tolerates being victimized, however.

Lisbeth’s past experiences and present expertise make her suitable for the job of helping Mikael find out who killed teenage Harriet. The film is half over before they join forces, and when they do there is some uncertainty about whether their relationship will remain strictly professional. (OK, maybe not that much uncertainty.) But beyond that, there’s nothing compelling about their partnership. The characters are intriguing separately, but their relationship to each other is no more interesting than the one between the two lead cops in a Law & Order episode, and it’s fraught with a lot more implausibility. Mikael and Lisbeth are barely believable as a professional duo, let alone a personal one. Whatever Craig and Mara needed to do, chemistry-wise, to make this partnership work, it didn’t happen.

Still, the Harriet mystery, growing deeper and more gruesome as new facts come to light, is whatever you’d call the movie equivalent of a page-turner. Stellan Skarsgard, Steven Berkoff, Geraldine James, and Joely Richardson shine in supporting roles as Vangers and Vanger associates. (Robin Wright is wasted as Mikael’s editor and lover.) A viewer who hasn’t read the book or seen the other movie — i.e., who doesn’t already know what’s going to happen — will no doubt find the story’s whodunit aspect satisfying.

But while this is clearly a David Fincher creation, with the images meticulously composed, the violence shocking but clinical, and the Trent Reznor/Atticus Ross musical score suitably dispassionate, the director never finds a way to make it his own. Making a film based on a recent book that’s already been adapted once puts the fiercely independent Fincher in the position of having to convince viewers that his heart is truly in this, that he’s not doing it as a favor to the studio or out of some contractual obligation. What he has delivered is adequate, but it doesn’t have any flavor — and of all the things Fincher is, “bland” is not usually one of them.

Grade: C+


Tags: , , ,

comments
  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_A3QRS3WJ2CFEWA4VLJFSWITFWU Myra

    I never thought  the books were as much about solving the mistery as they were about the true evil side of human nature, the rotten state of society and violence against women. I’m glad that Fincher did a great job making the mistery solving so engrossing but I’m happy to see (if this review is trustworthy in they way it describes the film) that there’s more to it than just solving a close room kind of mystery because that would have been Hollywood’s cheapest and safest approach to film the book. Lisbeth Salander and the way she feels about the people surrounding her is by far more important than discovering the true killer, a mistery that I solved in with just the few clues given to us in the first 10 chapters of the book, it was somehow predictable.Now I’m getting more and more interested in seeing Fincher’s take and I’m sure it won’t disappoint me. 

  • Anonymous

    no better or worse than the original? that means this remake was unnecessary after all.

  • Butlerives

    I think Fincher did an excellent job..and Trent, well…you just can’t go wrong.  I can’t wait to see it again.  As far as Mr. Snider, he doesn’t really look like the type to “get it”..if you know what I mean (with all due respect).  As a NIN fan, I found this movie beautifully dark and cool.  And I’ve seen all three of the other movies and read all the books.  Excellent work!

    Mr. Snider, I am curious if you happen to read this:
    What movies in the past few years have you given a+’s too?

    I give this movie an A.  I only wish Lisbeth was a little sexier.

  • Butlerives

    One other note, the author of this review, Mr. Snider, didn’t like the first movie…which rocked, of course..so that should tell you something..It’s just not his type of “thing” it seems.

    Fincher, Reznor, Larson…is this a trick question?  Just go see it for yourself..If you like the others, you’ll love this..And pay attention to the music score..it’s important to the theme and Trent nailed it.

  • Nemo

    Obviously your tastes favor the Pixar genre. I’m sure “Finding Nemo” received an “A++” in your impeccable artistic opinion. Elitist, jeesh! It must be beneath your station writing critiques for the common rabble.

  • http://twitter.com/CattNips Anne

    Thanks for the review.

    If people have not seen the original trilogy, they will not really get what this movie is really about. It’s complex and the trilogy was beautifully filmed . Replace/Salandar in the original is far different than Rooney who I understand never read the books.  Too bad.

    I, too, think Fincher over reached on this.  Or maybe it’s just because this story nor film is not his.  It was done before and I believe that can’t be topped

  • Bill R

    I’m a huge fan of Eric’s and generally agree with his reviews. I think he gets this one wrong, however. As has been mentioned in another comment, the theme of the movie is violence against women. The audience isn’t supposed to completely ‘buy’ Mikael and Lisbeth’s relationship – we’re supposed to ‘buy’ that Lisbeth can have a physical relationship with someone without being a victim. In my opinion, Fincher gets the tone of the film exactly right.

  • Butlerives

    Never read the books? From where did u get that?

    “As for why she signed on to the movie – and subsequent sequels – Rooney added, “I had read the books, and like the rest of the world, I’d fallen in love with the character.”

    From ABC

  • Septembermary

    I was surprised by how unmoved I was by this movie. Your review helped me understand why. Thanks!

  • http://www.thecampussocialite.com/ Dan Asulin

    While I agree that the relationship is both implausible and kind of random, I think it’s besides the point. I think the real story is a damaged woman, abused and kept by the men in her life, coming across the only man in the film who is good-natured and harmless. Their relationship is her breaking free from the emotional bondage men have forced her into. I was much more disappointed in the way it ended. I don’t think the one character I was made to feel true compassion for ending up hurt by the one man she allowed herself to trust helped the movie in any way.

  • Randy

    I felt this was one of the better movies I’ve watched in the past couple of years.  I immediately read the book when I finished seeing the movie, and was very satisfied with it as well.  I felt the movies screen play stayed very true to the book.  I would recommend this movie or book to anyone looking for a strong fast paced story.  There were no slow spots in the movie for a rather long film @ 2 hrs. and 40 minutes.

  • Scarlett_o_hara_4

    I have read all 3 books and love them. I think if the reviewer had read the books he’d have a much better understanding of the Lisbeth/Mickeal relationship. I’ve seen the original Swedish adaptation and was disgusted at how they butchered a marvellous book. I’m going to see this version tomorrow and I hope Fincher has done a better job, I have high hopes as I’m a big fan!

  • Anonymous

    I agree with you about the ending. I haven’t read the books and didn’t go into the movie thinking Lisbeth would be such a likable person (I’ve had people laugh at me for saying that). I saw the public person who pushed people away (taking up two seats on the train so no one could get near her, her inability/unwillingness to make eye contact in many cases, etc.) set against her private vulnerability and the desire to find love in her life. In a word, I found her utterly charming and open. Which brings me to the “end”. While, as I said, I agree with you about that, remember (and, again, I haven’t read the books) it isn’t really the “end”. Right? This “end” is sure to evolve and we don’t really know whether or not the relationship between Mikael and Erika has already changed or will change. I strongly suspect it has or will. By the way, Mikael isn’t the “only” man who she was able to trust. She had the older gentleman who was almost died (don’t remember his name), but that only made me feel more compassion for her.

  • Carrie

    I read the books, and I found them cold and not emotionally compelling, either.  And I never thought that the relationship between Lisbeth and Blomkvist seemed plausible or had any meat to it.