Film

What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011)

Director: David Fincher

Time Out rating

Average user rating

33 reviews

Movie review

From Time Out London

Trespassing on 007’s territory, the opening-credits sequence to David Fincher’s ‘The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo’ sees wires swirling, melting and reforming as an oily black liquid to create ultra-smooth, cybersexual impressions of the main characters’ faces appearing and disappearing. The message from the director of ‘The Social Network’ and ‘Fight Club’ is clear: this is a more slick, more expensive, better-looking but no less provocative spin on the first novel in Stieg Larsson’s all-things-to-all-readers Millennium Trilogy.

Some may be surprised at how similar Fincher’s version is to the 2009 Swedish film in plot and mood, and even Fincher can’t avoid stretches that feel like souped-up Nordic television drama. But fans of the book and film should rest easy at how this ‘Dragon Tattoo’ is still inherently a Swedish tale – set and partly shot in Sweden – and Fincher doesn’t flinch from the sexual violence at their core.

Daniel Craig gives a relaxed Sunday of a performance, with appropriate knitwear, as Mikael Blomkvist, the disgraced journalist (essentially Julian Assange, if he was likeable) hired to uncover the secrets of an old industrialist family with a Nazi past, while Rooney Mara (who had a small part in ‘The Social Network’) tears it up as Lisbeth Salander. Mara is prettier and more fragile than Noomi Rapace, but she’s also more dead behind the eyes, more haunted. Her Salander gives her body over to Blomkvist in two brisk, forceful sex scenes – but never gives him a hint of a smile. It’s a storming performance that gives the film its soul.

As you’d expect from Fincher, the storytelling is immaculate, and he negotiates a mix of accents, all speaking English, with little distraction. Yet whatever bells and whistles you hang off this tale, there’s no escaping that its murder mystery element is fairly pulpy and unremarkable. Still, Fincher showed in ‘Se7en’ and ‘Zodiac’ that a hunt for a serial killer is a story template that allows him to go far in exploring character and atmosphere, the latter of which is ramped up no end here by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross’s discomfiting score.

Author: Dave Calhoun

Time Out London Issue 2157

Email Tweet Share

User reviews of this film

blib said...

Posted on Mar 16 2012 09:56 Jafar, you have far too much time on your hands.
Good film but not a classic.

Report as inappropriate
Deec said...

Posted on Feb 11 2012 19:13 Enjoyable but not as good as the Swedish version. Liked Daniel Craig but didnt connect with Rooney Mara as Lisbeth and I didnt find it as engrossing as the original.

Report as inappropriate
sugomez said...

Posted on Feb 05 2012 07:00 I am watching the American version and it is so boring that I decided to write this comment. Where is the relationship between Lisbeth and Mikael?
Where is the flow?
What happened to the rape scene, To Lisbeth boy-like body, and to her personality?
She is so disconnected and. . . scared.I couldn't keep my eyes off the screen in the Swedish version and I fell in love with Lisbeth, everything about her was perfect and intentional.
In my opinion, only Hollywood fans can prefer this new version.
Oh, one more thing, the mean guy is SO obvious here! I was shocked. I expected to prefer the Swedish version, because I like international films, but this is worse than I ever thought

Report as inappropriate
yiorgos said...

Posted on Jan 31 2012 04:03 Hated the score - intrusive and often badly placed.

Report as inappropriate
critique said...

Posted on Jan 29 2012 21:02 Judged on its own merits, this is a pacy enjoyable thriller. Compared to the Swedish language film, it is shinier and less clunky. Craig is not as bland as Nyqvist and Mara is not so fierce as Rapace. I maintain that the book would have been better served by a tv series (it may yet arrive). Three and a half stars.

Report as inappropriate
Gee said...

Posted on Jan 29 2012 14:13 I was disappointed
I founds the original film disappointing because the dubbing was poor and the actors amateur apart from Noomi Rapace and Armanski. I really thought the Hollywood version would be sensational and it was if anything more disappointing because even though many of the characters were better the central character Lisbeth was nowhere near as well portrayed by Rooney Mara who lacked the fire and passionate hatred that the book made obvious, and Noomi Rapace captured perfectly. Wast of money as the original fell short of the magnificent narrative of the book. I would recommend people read the book if they want to really get a gripping story as the cinema has failed to come anywhere close to what has to be one of the best thriller series of modern times

Report as inappropriate
John Cooper said...

Posted on Jan 23 2012 23:43 When I go the cinema, I want to see a good film, . . . . . and this is a good film, I don't want to see a purist adaptation of a novel which I haven't read and might never read. I don't accept the `iconic`
status which feminists attach to Nooni Rapace's interpretion of Salander. Rooney Mara is just as good, and as some viewers have observed, she makes the role her own. I urge readers to ignore comments by looney feminists
such as Mrs Gubbins and other critics who can't accept
that mainstream cinema has produced a superior remake. Oh yes, Daniel Craig gives a great performance
displaying a vulnerability that comes as a surprise after
the OO7 films. I liked the Swedish version . . but , on the whole , this is better . . .

Report as inappropriate
ERIC W. said...

Posted on Jan 21 2012 15:15 Don't listen to anybody who hasn't read all 3 books. You need to read the books to understand whats going on. Thank goodness I'd read the books so I could explain to my friend what was happening. On the whole a good film, but read the books.

Report as inappropriate
Andrew said...

Posted on Jan 11 2012 15:10 This is a good film if you not seen the original. Yet if you have then give this film a miss as it is no where as good, and it be cheaper to go and buy the original on dvd

Report as inappropriate
Sutton said...

Posted on Jan 11 2012 13:43 A good enough film, though the original is better. I was curious due to the involvement of Mr Fincher and Mr Craig. I don’t think they changed it much to warrant a remake.

Report as inappropriate
mrsgubbins said...

Posted on Jan 09 2012 18:20 Congratulation Time Out London for, once again, playing your role in the side-lining and humiliation of women in film. Even the great evenging angel Lisbeth Salander is neutered and made pathetic in the shape of the dead eyed, willowy Rooney Mara who couldn't threaten a pug if her life depended on it.The 'love story' that Fincher has attempted to eke out of the Salander/Blomkvist relationship is offensive and in the poorest taste given the facts of the novel. This film is a cynical, depressing farce that I urge you not to see.

Report as inappropriate
Yawn said...

Posted on Jan 07 2012 15:45 Quite why Fincher became involved in this film is unclear - unless it was for the money. I'll wager Niels Oplev's version cost a good deal less than the Hollywood version, yet captures the book fantastically. Fincher's version is a hollow version I thought boring, and showed he had little knowledge of the geography of the region. Oplev's version captures the spirit of the book perfectly, and Noomi Rapace an excellent Lisbeth - I seriously wonder how many dragon tattoos she inspired. Even Rapace's dragon tattoo's better than the one Fincher/Hollywood could come up with for Rooney Mara. Avoid.

Report as inappropriate
Omri Stephenson said...

Posted on Jan 06 2012 09:51 Despite moments of visual brilliance and some good performances, Finchers version of Larson's thriller is ultimately a pointless exercise. With too many loose plot strands and lingering sadistic scenes of sexual violence and torture in near monochromatic wintery scandinavian surroundings, and an anti-climactic ending, how does this merit cinematic entertainment?

Report as inappropriate
attic23c said...

Posted on Jan 05 2012 13:43 Amazingly enjoyable film. If you like Zodiac, you'll love this and if you don't like Zodiac, don't come to mine for tea. The Craig-Mara relationship is fascinating, playing against gender stereotypes in an exciting and often amusing way. Having just recently read the book (N.B I haven't seen the original movie), I found it to be an almost faultless adaptation, encapsulating the essence of many great characters so slickly.

Report as inappropriate
good enough said...

Posted on Jan 04 2012 00:03 I thought this was as good as the previous film version. I suppose any adaptation of a book can get made if there looks to be money made from it, even if it's very soon after another one. I thought I was going to be itching to leave half-way through after reading the running time, but I actually found it interesting enough all the way through. I have to say, my non-offended response might be to do with the fact that I thought the previous film was a pretty good thriller, but that's all. This one was a pretty good thriller too.

Report as inappropriate