The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo - Fincher (2011)

Plot
Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig), a reporter for the news paper Millenium, is sentenced to pay fines, as one of his articles includes false accusations against a CEO. Mikael soon gets a call from Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer), formely the CEO of Vangerkoncernen. Mikael decides too meet with Henrik, but what he doesn't know is that Henrik Vanger's right hand Frode (Steven Berkoff) has been checking up on Michael, with the help of hacker Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara).

Henrik Vanger wants Blomkvist to help find his niece's killer, who mocks him by sending a picture of a flower every year. A gift his niece used to give him on his birthday. Mikael borrows a small house close to Henrik Vangers mansion, and starts to dig into the family's history.

Meanwhile, Lisbeth Salander tries to get trough, after her intendant gets a stroke Lisbeth's life is turned for the worse. After being sexually abused by her new intendant Nils Bjurman, she decides to get a revenge on him that he will never ever forget. At the same time, Blomkvist is starting to get somewhere in the case of Harriet Vanger's killer.

Opinion
This is a remake of a Swedish film that is really good. A film that is about two people working together before they even know they are. This is not the case in the American film. Lisbeth and Mikael are working in different places the whole time, and when the meet, for some reason they seem to be lovers since forever. Lisbeth has for some reason turned into a trusting, weak girl.

The un-swedishness of the stiff boring surroundings makes the film a poor choice if you like the original one. It seems like the director is using a lot of American, Swedish stereotypes. They look and behave like Americans think swedes does, and what they don't know, they make it american. This is not working, and everything from, dialogue to surroundings seems stiff and unnatural. It also annoys that they mix Swedish and English all the time. Keep it consistent, that would have been a bit better. I also find it weird that the American actors were speaking english poorly, and swedish poorly. Skarsgård were the only one actually speaking both languages the best.

There is no chemistry between the two actors either, and there is no conviction in their acting. It feels like they are just going trough the motions.

On top of that, there is a lot of things that you in the Swedish version can guess yourself too. Build you own story trough what happens in the plot, but in this case you can't build your own story. Everything, every little detail is shown, or told in the plot.

There are two things I can find that is good with the movie, and that is  1) the intro. It is computer animated and looks really good and 2) Stellan Skarsgård as Martin Vanger.

I will not recommend anyone to see if if you like the Swedish version. I will not recommend it anyway as the film is really awful.

Rooney dödade Lisbeth

Jag skrev för ett tag sedan ett inlägg om hur mina förväntningar på The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, och speciellt hur Rooney Mara verkade vara som Lisbeth Salander.
Igår kväll såg jag filmen.
Rooney Mara dödade Lisbeth Salander.
Hon rev ner precis allting som Noomi Rapace byggt upp med Lisbeth.
Nu får vi börja om igen.

Lisbeth Salander är en trasig kvinna, men hon är inte en kvinna med ett öppet sår. Hon blöder inte längre. Hon vill bara ha sin hämnd. Hon vill ha hämnd för andra.
Lisbeth klarar sig själv, och hon är inte dummare än hon behöver att vara. Salander vet vad hon vill ha, hon tar det och hon blir inte fäst vid saker.
Rooney Mara är öppen, frågar om hon får saker och blir förtjust i Mikael Blomkvist. Men hon frågar först om hon kan få det. Hon berättar allt om sig själv, och Lisbeth gör inte sådant. Lisbeth tar reda på det hon behöver, och bestämmer därefter om det är värt hennes tid eller inte. Oftast är det inte det. Hon lägger inte ner känslor där det inte behövs, och hon behöver ingen fasad.
Lisbeth litar inte på Blomkvist, hon litar inte på någon, och definitivt inte oss.
Inte utan att ha kollat upp oss, och visste hon våra innersta hemligheter skulle hon nog inte lita på oss så länge hon levde.

Mara har ingen glöd i sin blick som Noomi har. Lisbeth lever för vissa få saker, inget som Mara tar till sig alls.
Där Noomi som Lisbeth slår tillbaka, tar Mara emot och gör ingenting. Hon rör sig bara i ett rörelsemönster, utan övertygelse, utan tankar och utan list.

Jag kan verkligen inte hitta något bra med Maras version av Lisbeth och min förväntning att Lisbeth skulle vara en rockstjärne-wannabe blev infriad. Lisbeth har inte en fasad, Lisbeth är äkta. Mara är inte äkta. Hon har bara på sig kläderna för att revolta emot samhället. Som en tonåring, och hon beter sig som en tonåring. Hon får Lisbeth att verka som någon som ska vara omyndigförklarad.

Mara tar emot samhället med våld, Rapace tar emot samhället med list och rättvisa.

Tetro (Coppola, 2009)

Plot
Bennie (Alden Ehrenrich), a young boy, soon turning 18 shows up at his brother's apartment in Buenos Aires. His brother, Tetro (Vincent Gallo), ran away when Bennie were a young child. Tetro refuses to admit he has a family, but Bennie wants to know why Tetro ran away.

Tetro is now living with a woman named Miranda (Maribel Verdú), whom he met when he just came to Argentina, and is still a failed writer when Bennie finds him. Bennie and Miranda help each other to find out why Tetro ran off, and it turns out to be Bennie's family history that has been hidden for everyone, not Tetro's.

Opinion
Coppola has not always managed to succeed with his films, but in this one he does. It is a film noir, without the police detective, but with the intrigues.
The dialogue is well-written, and there are no giant holes in the plot. The black and white setting of the film makes shadows, lightning and sound important, and in this case the whole setting off the film fits perfectly in every aspect.

I would say that the actors fit their roles perfectly, and also, the characters personalities are also put together with great care. Tetro, the crusty one who refuses to talk to his brother, Miranda, the always happy and bubbly girlfriend and Bennie, the young innocent boy who can not say no.

This time Coppola managed to succeed. A film I would recommend to anyone if you can get hold of it!

Top-21!

Here is (I guess) my top 21 favourite films that I think everyone should watch some day!

• Carrie (De Palma, 1976)
• La vita è Bella ((Life is Beautiful) Benigni, 1997)
• M (Lang, 1931)
• Tim Burton's Nightmare Before Christmas (Selick, 1993)
• Iron Man (Favreau, 2008)
• The Others (Amenábar, 2001)
• Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari ((The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari) Wiene, 1920)
• Chocolat (Hallström, 2000)
• Nightmare on Elm Street (Craven, 1984)
• El laberinto del fauno ((Pan's Labyrinth)Del Toro, 2006)
• El orfanato ((The Orphanage/Barnhemmet) Bayona, 2007) 
• The Full Monty (Cattaneo, 1997)
• E.T.: The Extra-Terrstrial (Spielberg, 1982)
• What's eating Gilbert Grape  (Hallström 1993)
• Stand By Me (Reiner, 1986)
• American History X (Kaye, 1998)
• Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauen (Nosferatu, a symphony of Horror) Murnau, 1922)
• Bringing up Baby (Hawks, 1938)
• Gladiator (Scott, 2000)
• Friday Night Lights (Berg, 2004)
• Cry-Baby (Waters, 1990)

Challengers: Edward Scissorhands, Corpse Bride, The Crow, Watchmen, Howl's Moving Castle, Spirited Away, Children of The Corn, Halloween, The Lion King, Fight Club, Night of The Living Dead, Green Street Hooligans, Sin City, Henry- A Serial Killer, Finding Neverland, Donnie Darko, Batman - The Dark Knight, London To Brighton, Candy, Bravo Two Zero, Top Gun, Queen of The Damned, Underworld, Snarveien, Trolljegeren, House on Haunted Hill, Hellraiser, Alice In Wonderland, 28 Days Later, Blair Witch Project

Varför blir du rädd?

Skräckfilmer är idag en betydligt mer accepterad genre än vad den var för bara några årtionden sedan.
Vad är det då som gör att människan tycker om att se på saker som skrämmer dem?
Det är inte den frågan som jag tänker svara på nu, utan det jag ska försöka att skriva om, är det faktum att det inte alltid är det monstruösa som skrämmr en, utan det kan vara det helt vardagliga.

Om vi ser på några av de skräckfilmer som tar sig som mest läskiga i min ögon så ligger där Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween, Coraline och The Others. Något som tre av dem har gemensamt är att de alla utspelar sig i miljöer som man kan känna igen. (Nightmare on Elm Street anser jag är läskig av den orsaken att Kreuger ger sig på en där man ingenting kan göra något det. I drömmarna. Man kan inte be om hjälp, och man kan inte hjälpa sig själv. Gör det Kreuger till genial, eller bara en fegis?)

Om vi tar första exemplet som jag skulle vilja titta närmare på så är det Halloween. I originalfilmen så ser vi ett helt vanlig (om än bråkig) amerikansk familj, där yngste pojken har tendenser mot det makabra. Man skulle kunna kalla Mike Meyers för en psykopat, men det som gör det är att han egentligen inte är ett monster i stil med Dracula eller zombies, utan han är en helt vanlig människa, och filmen utspelar sig i helt vanliga miljöer som man kan känna igen sig i. Det behövs inget odött monsturöst för att skapa monster helt enkelt, ondska finns runtomkring oss.

Coraline jobbar på samma sätt. Boken, tänkt som en barnsaga, handlar om Coraline, vars föräldrar jobbar för mycket, och ofta har annat att göra än att leka med Coraline, som istället börjar att utforska för sig själv. Hon lyckas att hitta portalen till en annan värld. En värld som ser ut precis som den hon kommer från, men lite gladare, lite färgrannare, och med bättre föräldrar. Kruxet är, föräldrarna har knappar till ögonen. Mamman, som i alla andra aspekter är den perfekta mamman (hon lagar god mat till Coraline, och de båda vill leka med henne, och låter henne göra vad hon vill), visar sig vara inget annat än ondskefull, och tar barnens liv ifrån dem. Genom att invagga Coraline i en idyll värld, så försöker hon att få Coralina att ge sitt liv till henne. Vilket barn skulle inte vilja ha ett sådant liv som Coralines andra mamma ger henne?

Vi har här två exempel där det idylliska får besök av ett monster.
Det är i sådana här filmer som det är svårare att skilja på fiktion och verklighet. När börjar det påhittade, och när är världen precis som den är utanför filmen?

Just fallet med Halloween tycker jag är det mest talande för sådana här fall av skräckfilm. Mike Meyers är sprungen ur människa, vare sig utan att ha dött tidigare, eller att ha druckit någon konstig häxbrygd för att få några som helst krafter.

Personligen är jag fortfarande rädd för att någon kväll vakna och se att ljuset från fönstret störs av något, och att det står en livslevande Mike Meyers utanför.

There is only one Lisbeth Salander!

Rooney Mara is the actress who are portraying Lisbeth Salander in the Hollywood remakes of the Swedish film-trilogy based on Stieg Larsson's books.

It is, as usual that Hollywood can not leave perfectly good films alone but has to come along and ruin them it hurts when you see one of your favorite fictional characters becoming someone you do not recognize.

Noomi Rapace will alway be the Lisbeth Salander loved by those who like the movies.

Haven't we seen Hollywood ruin enough movies for us now?

I wonder why there even is a remake market for foreign films. As I see it, they do the remake, and people forget the original, or don't even know there is a original film. Is this because Hollywood is so scared that they will loose their status within the film-industry? Or are Americans to lazy to read the subtitles?

I doubt that any country ever will have as enormous film-industry as there are in Hollywood, even if they stopped doing remakes on foreign films.

While Noomi Rapace looks like a bad ass, as Lisbeth is, Mara looks like a wannabe-rock star.

Lisbeth Salander is not just dark clothes and lots of make-up, Lisbeth is a broken person, and that's the most important part, I doubt anyone could do that as good as Noomi does.

Also, this is bothering in the question: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/jacketcopy/2011/10/hm-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo.html. Why do one need a clothes collection to look like Lisbeth Salander? (I guess the american version of her). 

After watching the trailer one wonder, have they actually changed anything, or is it exactly the same, and in that case, wouldn't it have been cheaper to subtitle the original film? Is it really such a bother for American people to watch something from another culture than their own? Is it so hard to understand the context of objects and people, as we always have to do as most of the films shown worldwide are recorded in an american context, even though the settings might be from somewhere else?

No, there is only one, Lisbeth Salander.

(I will most probably come back to this subject when the remakes have hit Sweden around Christmas)

Personal trivia:

I have known for a while that the film was going to be made, and I hated the idea, always wondering what idiot director that's going to ruin my love for films this time. Today (27th October 2011) I checked, and realized that the director of this film is the director of many films I dislike, and he is using Brad Pitt in many of them. This can not become more horrible...

Also, I dislike Daniel Craig, he ruined James Bond for me...

*Edit 30/10 -2011*
http://www.aftonbladet.se/webbtv/noje/film/article13666143.ab
One of the trailers for the film.
The dialog are awful! I mean really, really awful!
Thank you Hollywood, for ruining a perfectly good film! It's appreciated.

Bright Star

Bright Star is directed by Jane Campion and released in 2009.

Plot

Bright Star is a film about the love-story of poet John Keats and Fanny Brawne and it is based on the book with the same name.

John Keats, a poet of the 19th Century, living with his friend Charles Brown in the outskirts of London. Trough Brown and the Dilkes family, Keats gets in touch with the Brawnes, and their daughter Fanny. Keats being a mediocre poet, does not dare to get to close to Fanny, even though he is drawn to her, because he can not offer her wealth or a steady life. At the same time as he tries to understand his feelings for Fanny and write, he is also taking care for his sick brother. 

Brown tries all he can to keep Fanny and John from each other, but he does not succeed. He tries to kick him out, and send him away, but in the end, Fanny and John becomes lover. After a trip to London, though, John becomes sick (most probably from the same illness his brother had), and some of his friends decides that a trip to Italy is the best way to make sure he gets well. Meanwhile, the maid in the Brawne house, becomes with child, and Brown accepts to pay for the child, and this makes it impossible for him to accompany Keats to Italy, instead, he will be the one who reads the letter from Italy to Fanny and her mother, which tells them of the death of the poet. 

Opinion

The film was a lot better than I thought it would be. I do not like the actors that much, but they are bearable. I have not seen anything made by Campion before (no, I have not seen The Piano before either), but she seems as looking at what other films she had done, to like this poetic kinds of film.

I was a bit suspicious, Keats being alongside Byron and Poe, one of my favourite 19th Century poets, on whether I would like the film or not.

I did like the use of poems trough the film, as I guess, to show emotions the no one could put words to, in hint things. Fanny using literature and poetry in a way to come close to the one she loves, even though there is obstacles in the way, she wanting to know everything about the interests of her love, even though her own interests lies elsewhere. 

If you want to look at a  sad romance film, this is the film to watch, so don't assume it is a film on the life of John Keats, then you will be annoyed on how they only care for the love story and his love poems.