The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo - The Daniel Craig Edition (Film #3)

how did an agoraphobe with two small children and no inclination to procure a babysitter find herself watching david fincher's latest opus?

i'll never tell.

let's start off with the basics. i've read the book (SHOCKER), i've seen the swedish version (MANDATORY), and now i've watched the american version (NATURAL EXTENSION OF THE CYCLE). when i read the book, the ENTIRE time, i kept saying, "dude, if they don't get daniel craig to play this guy in the movie, they're off their rockers!"...

...which must have been annoying to the seven people who read my goodreads review on the subject.

so, imagine my bliss when i heard about wee danny craig getting cast over some less stellar choices - johnny depp (let's all remember how well he played a writer in "the secret window", shall we?), george clooney (who is too cary grant winky for the role), and brad pitt (who historically can't do accents, see "Snatch", "Troy," etc.). and i get it, some of you all had "misconceptions" about the casting because daniel craig is super-mc-dreamy as james bond and y'all want to double-o his seven. i get that. he's not the action star here; that job is up to lisbeth. and he lets her do her job, so that he can do his.

and he does it well.

even if you never see him look like this:

so, i guess the big question other reviewers struggle with is: was this film necessary? didn't the swedish picture kinda-sorta hit it out of the park on greatness of awkward rape/sex/attempted murder scenes?

and i guess my answer is: no.

yes, the swedish version is intense and amazing and noomi rapace is SO much better in that film than she is in the new "sherlock holmes" (review to come) BUT there's no daniel craig, no christopher plummer, no charles widmore, no robin wright (post-penn), and perhaps the greatest flaw, no stellan skarsgard.

can we just put this out there: the whole word needs to thank god for the existence of stellan skarsgard (who not only gives the CREEPIEST performance ever in this movie, thus totally redeeming himself for that whole "pirates of the caribbean" thing but also for giving us alexander skarsgard in all his viking-esque glory).

fincher is really successful at manipulating the creep factor. another horrifying score by trent reznor (worst shout out in the film: plague's NIN shirt) augments the pervasive terror. the sleek, austere scandinavian decor - all teak and glass and white and minimalist - also feed into the slow brewing horror. it's clinical and yet totally tweaked - exactly the tone of the book.

there are some changes here - most of which i agree with and none of which i'll spoil - the narrative feels less clunky than the book and therefore more successful. we never, for example, have to sit through an awkward intermission while blomkvist goes to prison to think about why it's wrong to libel someone for a month or three. the film partly succeeds because it edits down the novel so that stories open and close together without any lingering doubts or concerns. the end is heartbreaking.

3.5 stars. i really have no impulse to ever watch this movie again, but i'm curious to see the next one.