The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Film: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2009)
Dir: Niels Arden Oplev
Rating: *** out of 5 stars



Not since Let the Right One In has a Swedish film gained so much attention States-side as The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Based on Stieg Larsson’s popular novel of the same name, the film is the first installment of the Millennium Trilogy, which also includes the sequels, The Girl Who Played with Fire and The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest. The first film is a pretty good murder mystery once it gets moving, but unfortunately it is exceeded by its own hype.

In the movie, disgraced journalist Mikael Blomkvist (Michael Nyqvist) is asked by wealthy industrialist Henrik Vanger to investigate the unsolved disappearance of his teenage niece Harriet roughly 40 years ago. As Henrik nears the end of his life, he yearns to finally put an end to the mystery that has tormented him for four decades. Mikael agrees to take the case and moves into the Vanger family’s island home.

Meanwhile, an emotionally-scarred young hacker named Lisbeth Salander (Noomi Rapace) tracks Mikael out of professional and personal interest. Her prying leads her to uncover clues in the Harriet Vanger case, so she joins Mikael in his investigation. Together they open the lid on some dark family history, and as they get closer to the truth, their own lives are put in danger.

The script, written by Nikolaj Arcel and Rasmus Heisterberg, is a bit slow at first. The film really picks up once the two lead characters get together and the investigation starts to get interesting. Prior to that, there is a lot of background story provided for Lisbeth, which occupies much of the first hour. Still, the visual history makes her that much more of an intriguing character study. She carries a lot of emotional baggage, and some of her traumatic experiences explain her interest in Harriet’s disappearance. One piece of her history that is underrepresented in the film is the titular dragon tattoo, which is shown once and never addressed again. Furthermore, Lisbeth is more a sidekick than a centerpiece of the story, so why is her tattoo so important that it made the title? I suspect the novel touched on its significance, but the movie does not, which is perplexing.

Once the exciting portion gets underway, Dragon Tattoo is a pretty effective who-dun-it thriller. There are many potential suspects, misleading clues, and disturbing motives. The story involves religious fanaticism, cult rituals, and Nazis – all wrapped up in a taut, realistic murder mystery. The ending is a bit abrupt and all-too-convenient, but it is seemingly only as such because of the planned sequels. As Lisbeth, Noomi Rapace has garnered a lot of attention and deservedly so, as she is quite good. Michael Nyqvist, on the other hand, has not been quite as noticed by American audiences but he is also very good in the film.

Of course there is already an American remake of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo in the works. Fortunately, that remake will have David Fincher at the helm, so there is a very real possibility that it will be better than the Oplev’s film. Frankly, the original Dragon Tattoo is overhyped. It is an enjoyable movie, but not nearly as brilliant as some self-proclaimed art house film buffs seem to think it is. I have only seen the first installment so far, but at this point, I am more interested in seeing Fincher’s re-boot than the two Swedish sequels.

Read More

Touching the Void

Film: Touching the Void (2003)
Dir: Kevin Macdonald
Rating: ***** out of 5 stars



True-life survival stories are always captivating. A lazy director could simply make a by-the-books documentary and still produce a tear-jerker. When Kevin Macdonald made Touching the Void, however, he constructed an amazing film using tense re-enactments, survivor interviews, and gorgeous cinematography. Prior to seeing this film, I knew the story of mountaineer Joe Simpson’s brush with death in the Andes, and it was interesting and inspiring. But this movie brings it to life with such intensity and emotion that it had me in tears within the first 25 minutes.

In 1985, two young British mountaineers Joe Simpson and Simon Yates dared to ascend the Siula Grande, a mountain in the Peruvian Andes that had never been successfully climbed. Amazingly, they make it 20,000+ feet up the mountain despite treacherous snow conditions. In a completely isolated part of Peru, thousands of feet up on a dangerous peak, the unthinkable happens – Joe breaks his leg. What follows is a series of unbelievable events as Simon risks his own life to save his friend, and Joe endures an unimaginable ordeal to stay alive. To say anything more would spoil 1.5 hours of beautiful, intense, heart-wrenching storytelling - and it’s all true.

Between interviews with the real Joe and Simon, there are replications of the events using actors and/or stuntmen. These scenes dominate the film, making it more of an action-drama than a traditional documentary. They are also the most realistic re-enactments I have ever seen. It feels like you are really there, watching the situation as it unfolds. These actors look like they are truly going through everything Joe and Simon did. The re-enactments are shot on a large mountain that easily doubles for Siula Grande. Many times, I found myself wondering, “How did they do that?!”at these amazing actors/stuntmen. It is very easy to forget this is not happening live.

Macdonald utilizes sound brilliantly to create tension and fear. Cracking ice, howling wind, and falling snow make it so the viewer can practically feel the frostbite. The music is also a huge part of why the film is so tense and occasionally horrifying. With hardly any dialogue, the music really carries the re-enactment portions of the film. The snowy landscapes and cinematography are breath-taking. We see everything from the epic span of the mountain to the tiniest details in the ice. I wish I could see Void in IMAX as it would be ideal for that medium.

Aside from the great filmmaking, this is just one fantastic story. It has so many amazing twists and turns that it’s hard to believe that it all really happened to someone. Not only is it your classic tale of survival against all odds, but it’s a moving story about friendship. What Simon did for his friend is courageous and few others would do the same. Furthermore, seeing the real Joe and Simon telling their story is great. They are both charismatic men with great personalities and they tell their story with complete honesty – even when it’s unflattering. The way Joe describes his ordeal is often so poetic and beautiful. I have not read his book on which this film is based, but having watched this, I have no doubt it must be a great read.

Touching the Void is a perfect transition between Kevin Macdonald’s early documentaries and his later narrative features (i.e., The Last King of Scotland) because it has the best aspects of each. This unique docu-drama style has the feel-good inspiration of a documentary with the thrills of a big-budget action flick. It grabs the viewer right from the start and its grip only gets tighter with each passing moment. Macdonald’s brilliant combination of two filmmaking styles, in addition to his solid skills as a director, has created an unforgettable testament to the power of friendship and to the strength of the human spirit.

Read More

A Horrible Way to Die

Film: A Horrible Way to Die (2010)
Dir: Adam Wingard
Rating: *** out of 5 stars



A Horrible Way to Die is the latest feature from indie horror director Adam Wingard. It is not a well-known title yet, but it has been drawing a lot of attention at recent film festivals, including Fantastic Fest where the writer and lead actors won a few awards. The film was made on a shoestring budget but that fact does not distract from its good writing, fine performances, and even some solid gore. Unfortunately, frantic camerawork does heavily distract from the good parts and therefore drags the movie down a bit.

Sarah (Amy Seimetz) is a recovering alcoholic with a dark past. After moving to a new town, she joins AA in hopes of beating her problem and starting a new life. Although reluctant to begin a relationship, she agrees to go on a date with a fellow AA member, Kevin (Joe Swanberg). As the two grow closer, Sarah knows that she must tell him her dark secret, that her ex-boyfriend is convicted serial killer Garrick Turrell (AJ Bowen). Making matters worse, Turrell just escaped from prison with his sights set on Sarah, killing anyone who gets in his way.

Screenwriter Simon Barrett has constructed a simple yet effective script. The concept and the characters are well-written. The tension is slow-to-build in places, but the story picks up toward the end and wraps up nicely. Complementing Barrett’s writing are some talented actors. Indie darling Amy Seimetz is very good in the lead role. Sarah is 100% victim – she is not a strong female figure but we get the impression that perhaps she once was. Alcoholism and Turrell have seemingly made her this way – a ruined woman. Seimetz is an ideal match for the part of this woman emotionally battered by her own demons.

However, it is AJ Bowen who really steals the movie as Garrick. Like many serial killers, Turrell is a man of few words, but complex nonetheless. In Bowen’s face, you can see how the character struggles with his urge to kill – how he genuinely means it when he promises not to hurt his victims right before he murders them. The kill scenes are brutal and bloody – a stark contrast against the flashbacks in which Garrick is tender with his then-girlfriend Sarah. Bowen delivers the perfect blend of intensity and sympathy for the role.

Wingard’s storytelling style is effective, as the film flows well, but his visual choices are questionable. Most shots are out of focus, shake wildly, or veer away from anything of relevance (actors, scenery, etc.). This kind of nauseating camerawork does nothing to help the film. Presumably, Wingard’s intention was to symbolize the frantic nature of each scene – a filmmaking choice that lacks originality. Whatever his goal, it looks like his cameraman has some combination of ADD and epilepsy. This is not pleasant to watch, nor does it instill a sense of tension or uneasiness. It just comes across as annoying to the viewer. In many shots, the lighting and set design are great – it is a shame to have those aspects hidden by a runaway camera.

The concept of A Horrible Way to Die is as old as the horror genre itself – a girl being stalked by a killer. But this is not a typical cat-and-mouse story, as it deals more with internal menaces such as dark secrets, addiction, and denial. The film makes good use of its meager budget, and despite some eye-straining camerawork, is an interesting little thriller worth checking out.

Read More

Inception

Film: Inception (2010)
Dir: Christopher Nolan
Rating: ****1/2 out of 5 stars



Benjamin Franklin once said, "In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes." Since Ben is dead and this is my review, allow me to throw in a third certainty - Christopher Nolan's ability to make amazing movies. He has yet to let me down, and I suspect he never will. His latest mind-bender Inception is not my favorite of his movies - probably not even in the top three - but it is still an exciting heist film and a fun exercise for the mind.

Fugitive and thief Dominic Cobb (Leonard DiCaprio) specializes in hijacking people's dreams and robbing their minds of secrets and ideas. When a powerful businessman offers him a job and a clean record, he has no choice but to accept. However, the goal of this job is not to steal an idea but to plant one - a principle known as "inception". To do this, Cobb must assemble a talented team and dig deep into the target's subconscious. This proves to be no easy task as they face militant dream projections and risk slipping into a permanent state of unconsciousness.

Inception breaks the audience down into three distinct types: 1) people who do not understand anything that is going on; 2) people who get it and love it; 3) people who get it - or claim to get it - but hate it because simply type #2 loves it. These snobs complain the movie is excessively convoluted, and then bitch about the missed details. Make up your minds! I fall in the second category. I get the general idea and the basic concepts, and I appreciate what they mean. If you spend the whole movie nitpicking the little details, you will miss out on all the fun.

There is no denying the film is complex, but it is not just for the sake of being complex. Dreams are complex. Heist movies are complex. Just look at the elaborate schemes Danny Ocean and his crew come up with in those films. So when you have crime professionals breaking into the human mind, things are gonna get complicated. Besides, it is more fun that way - like solving a puzzle.

The complexity is not some gimmick to trick audiences into thinking this is high-class art. Just like Memento's backwards non-linear storytelling was not a gimmick - it was directly related to the story and what the protagonist was experiencing. In both films, Nolan puts you in the perspective of his characters, whether they be haunted by fleeting memories or a complex, nothing-is-what-it-seems dream world. This same argument is why I defend Inception's already-infamous ending, but I won't go into that here.

Visually, Nolan delivers unique and beautiful imagery as always. It is complemented by a haunting Hans Zimmer score. Inception combines some of the best elements from Nolan's other work - the moody emotions of Memento or Insomnia; the mind-trickery of The Prestige; and the glorious action sequences of The Dark Knight.

Furthermore, the cast is fantastic. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Marion Cotillard, and Tom Hardy particularly stand out, but I truly loved everyone in the film. Between this and Shutter Island, DiCaprio has finally earned my full respect as an actor. No longer does he look like a teenager in his father's clothes. He has matured into a formidable thespian and he truly owns this role.

If you go into this film expecting your mind to be blown, you will probably be disappointed. It may be a thinker, but it is not so much profound as it is a fun puzzle. Nolan gives us a completely unique concept and spins it into one exciting heist film. I'm sure he wants us to stress the how's, why's, and what-if's, but if you do, just don't let it stop you from enjoying the ride.

Read More