While Hollywood wrestles with the American adaptation of Stieg Larsson's The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (directed by David Fincher, adapted by Steve Zaillian, and possibly starring Daniel Craig and--my fervent hope--Carey Mulligan), the Swedish film industry has beaten everyone to the punch with film adaptations of all three of Larsson's Millennium Trilogy books. The first one is already out in the US--with the second one, The Girl Who Played with Fire--coming in August. The third book, The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest, is also already filmed and out in Sweden and Europe.
As adaptations go, Dragon ranks up there with The Maltese Falcon, To Kill A Mockingbird, and LA Confidential when it comes to faithfulness. In fact, it's so faithful at times, it's hard to watch. Larsson's books are violent and shocking at times, but when you read the words on a printed page, you can gloss over them and move on or linger on them and be sickened. When someone else films them and decides what they're going to look like, you're stuck. Dragon isn't--in a very few moments--for everyone. But it is a compelling, thrilling movie.
The star is Noomi Rapace, who plays Lisbeth Salander, the hacker hero with a hardened heart who is at the core of all three of Larsson's books. Rapace, sporting a dark Goth look that looks chilling at first, was a gifted Swedish actor who became an "overnight sensation" with this role, despite over ten years of acting in her native country. She plays Salander to a tee, perfect in appearance, demeanor, and emulating anti-social behavior.
I wish I could say the same about the actor playing Mikael Blomkvist, Michael Nyqvist, another respected Swedish actor. He's a bit of a stiff in my eyes, looking befuddled most of the time, and showing very little emotion as a journalist caught up in a murder mystery (see my review of the book version here). Rapace is the real star of the film and the movie only comes alive--just as the book does--when Salander is on the screen.
The film takes place in and around Sweden and the location shooting is effective if not exactly compelling. The director, Niels Arden Oplev, and screenwriters do an incredibly efficient job of bringing the long, character-filled book onto the screen. They telescope the extensive, boring Wennerstrom affair that dominates large portions of the book into a sleek, compact thing of beauty in the movie, and also winnow out some of the other action (Blomkvist's affairs with a Vanger family member and his partner in Millennium magazine) that tied up a lot of unnecessary pages in Larsson's original book. I'm very curious to see what they do with the two follow-up books, which introduce an incredible amount of characters, as Salander is on the run and unjustly accused of murder.
Of even greater interest is what Hollywood is going to do with these properties. Fincher did a great job with Zodiac, a sweeping true-life tale of the killer who haunted San Francisco and the Bay Area for many years. We know he can do a suspenseful movie. Zaillian is the go-to guy for adaptations, including Schindler's List, Hannibal, Gangs of New York, and Clear and Present Danger. My biggest concern is they'll try and change the country of origin to America, England, or Canada. Part of the charm of Larsson's books is the bleak country of Sweden, beautiful for three or four months each year, cold and foreboding the rest of time. There's also so much of the country's political DNA embedded in the books that it would be hard to recreate them in another country.
In the meantime, the Swedish film trilogy is a fascinating look at how that country regards its most successful novels--and films--ever. Dragon holds the box office record for a Swedish film in a country most famous for bleak Ingmar Bergman dramas. While death plays a large part in the film, there's nary a scythe-bearing hooded figure in sight...except maybe for Lisbeth Salander herself.
Comments