Millénium : Ce qui ne me tue pas

As a girl, Lisbeth escaped from her psychotic Russian mob father leaving behind her sister Camilla. In the present, Lisbeth Salander (Claire Foy) is an avenging angel for abused women. She is hired by Frans Balder (Stephen Merchant) who is desperate to retrieve his computer program from the American NSA which is capable of controlling the world's nukes. NSA agent Ed Needham (LaKeith Stanfield) tracks the theft to Stockholm but thugs had already attacked Lisbeth and stolen the program from her. Her only clue is a security pic of a man with a spider tattoo. She recruits Mikael Blomkvist (Sverrir Gudnason)'s help who hasn't seen her for three years. The spider's web leads back to Lisbeth's father and her sister Camilla Salander (Sylvia Hoeks).

It's the second movie in the American version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo franchise. The story is new from a different novelist. Everybody is new. Lisbeth is new. Mikael is new. The director is new. That's all the more reason why the central relationship between Lisbeth and Mikael needs to be re-established much earlier. They aren't actually in the same room until over an hour into the movie. There is also a change in Lisbeth's crusade where she is normally a vigilante figure for female victims. In this one, she turns into James Bond with global nuclear war as her crusade. There's the NSA and the Russians. It's a Bond movie. It's not the same as the original. The story is not that confusing but it can be more focused. I like the concept of Camilla but like Mikael, she needs to get into the movie sooner. As for Claire Foy playing Lisbeth, she is fine but needs a bit more darkness and her sexuality. It's really like a Bond movie where darkness and sexuality exist but The Dragon Tattoo franchise is supposed to take it to a grimmer level.

Boy, a lot of people disliked this movie. It suffers from the strength of its predecessors. It also suffers from too much for one film. We don't get enough psychological foundation, for one thing The bad guys have way too much power and this thing they can launch is pretty hard to swallow. Imagine that she and her sister have the future of the world in their hands. Thirdly, it is based on a book, written after the original series (an average book but entertaining). the problem is it ignores major plot elements. I doubt we'll see any more of these films.

I'm gonna sound biased, but the truth is that I am. David Fincher come back! I miss his take of "Millennium", which was brilliantly engaging. But we gotta accept the fact that the whole trilogy couldn't be adapted because of the first film not being financially successful enough. The fourth book was also the first in the series to not be written by Stieg Larsson, but instead by David Lagercrantz. Must have been a daunting task following in the footsteps of the world-wide bestsellers. I remember that my dad recognised him in a store once. So he went up to Lagercrantz, said hello and then left him in peace. My dad said he didn't wanna say anything else because he was being criticised and under pressure for taking over the series. That's when I first heard about it - and yes, I was sceptic as well. The trailers had me worried. The direction was gonna be faster, more action oriented and appeal to an even wider audience. I get that, sure. But the brilliance of "Dragon Tattoo" is its investigate dark mystery. Look how the story is told and how the audience is always interested in finding the answers to the questions. Was "Spider's Web" any good? Well... Better than I expected.

Fede Alvarez is not a bad director choice. I underestimated him. He knows how to get the stylish imagery. There's a good eye here since many creative ideas are being used for the shots. It gets points for that. He uses some shaky cam in the intense scenes. Thankfully there's a good balance of steady and hand-held camera use. I've seen Claire Foy getting much work recently. My bets where that she would portray Lisbeth Salander being hysterical or explosive. I was wrong because she lands a solid performance. Subtle when she needs to be, and even showing the emotion that's underneath Lisbeth's tough exterior. Surprisingly she's even funny. Sverrir Gudnason shows a warm interpretation of Mikael Blomkvist. He comes across as a friendly person who's presence lightens the mood. Not a bad take either. I would in all honesty have been ecstatic if Rooney Mara and Daniel Craig had returned. Then again Fede Alvarez felt he wouldn't had done 50% of his job if he took Fincher's cast. I don't really agree, but I understand what he means. The first act of the film was pretty alright. The look, the pacing and the introduction of the story worked. You can tell by the beginning that the style direction will be something else: An action-thriller. Salander has become a vigilante. That's something I feel kind of "Eh.." about. Clearly not the original intention. If you look at it as a James Bond type film, you'll enjoy it quite a lot. Don't go in expecting a moody crime mystery. That's not what you'll get. The story is not as isolated but more expanded involving Nato or Swedish Special Forces and people running after computer programs. Seemed more far-fetched than what it needed to be.

The experience of watching "Spider's Web" was enjoyable. You can have fun with the action and your suspenseful scenes. As a typical action movie, it does the job. The villain in the piece stood out to me. Sylvia Hoeks (who we saw in "Blade Runner 2049") delivers an eerie enemy for Salander. I get the feeling she's not gonna get enough credit for this role since her entire character doesn't fit the "supposed" realistic tone. It's a person straight out of a James Bond movie. And there I go again with that comparison, but it's actually got more in common with that now that I think of it. The villain is acted well - The issue is just that she belongs in another film entirely. I went in afraid of what the film would turn out to be, and it wasn't bad. Although it doesn't capture the greatness of "Dragon Tattoo". Stick to the originals for real grittiness. But if you want a fast thrill-ride, then this is decent. Biggest take away: Nice to see Stockholm depicted this nicely in american production again.

I was a bit surprised when the name of the English translator rolled in the credits, as it really seems no one involved in this movie read any of the books. They really only needed and used the name recognition of the characters.

The Acting is quite good. If fact almost everything in this movie is above par compared with most Hollywood shoot-em-ups. But the story, if you can really call it a story, is just so banal. We are told the good guys are good and the bad guys are bad and then we have the plot twist. Yawn.

The first Millennium-novel adaptation was a slam-dunk piece of world cinema, featuring plot- and character-driven tension, a very moody atmosphere, stellar performances from the cast, and, equally important, daring subject matter. The dark underbelly of Swedish society (or Western society in general) wasn't ignored but often shown in its full ugliness. The two sequels made for television may have lacked the great plot but still had most of the other ingredients that made this series so deliciously unglamorous and un-Hollywood. Even David Fincher remained very respectful to the material, and re-adapted the first book as Swedish as could be, with equal parts plot and character, great actors and beautiful photography of the cold Swedish landscape. There was rejoice when it was announced that he would also adapt the next two books back-to-back. But then there was silence.... and probably studio interference.

What exactly happened is still unclear, but for some reason, a decision was made to skip book 2 and 3 and go straight to the fourth, written by David Lagercrantz after original author Stieg Larsson had died. Fincher (no stranger to studio indecisiveness since Alien 3) and his cast probably skipped town after that, so the studio decided (or had no other choice than) to do a "soft reboot" with a new cast and crew. And that didn't go flawlessly.

Fede Alvarez, the guy who made it rain blood in the Evil Dead remake, didn't exactly sound like the logical choice as director; then again, neither did Peter Jackson for Lord of the Rings. And Alvarez also made Don't Breathe, where he didn't shy away from an insane and dark twist at the end. Being originally a non-Hollywood director, he could have brought some unique sensibilities to the table. But alas, it wasn't meant to be, because The Girl in the Spider's Web just got the Hollywood treatment, and not in all the good ways.

Gone is the deliberately slow pace that gave ample opportunities for character development and world building. Where the previous movies fully integrated the Swedish environments into the storytelling as a character in itself, they are now mostly relegated to being extras. There is nice photography and some photogenic locations, but they feature mostly in brief establishing shots or as background (with the exception of one nice setpiece involving a vertical-lift bridge). Partially to blame are the film's excessive pacing and action, which leave little time to linger on the locale. Apparently, the makers thought it necessary to beef up the story with fast-edited, Bourne-like action and slick explosions. Now admittedly, it looks good on screen, but this is not necessarily the film for it, because the plot and characterizations noticeably suffer from this need to keep things constantly in motion.

The story feels kind of familiar: Lisbeth Salander agrees to help a client, but powerful criminals interfere and set her up for murder, making her intent on getting the perpetrators and staying out of the hands of the authorities. If you thought this sounds like The Girl Who Played With Fire (book 2), then the appearance of an unstoppable muscular blond guy will not be too surprising either. The problem, however, is that the thin plot comprises little more than everyone chasing a technological McGuffin. If it isn't easy enough to shoot holes in such a premise, the implausibilities and coincidences pile up throughout the story, like people with selective memories, and police cars that can conveniently track and control a random car by GPS. Towards the end, the movie starts to rely more and more on high-tech gadgets that belong in a James Bond or Mission Impossible movie. Granted, it makes for some pleasing action scenes, but it removes much of the vulnerability and humanity that the previous films were famous for.

The most unfortunate consequence of all that plot-driven storytelling and blockbuster treatment is that the characters remain so underdeveloped. Claire Foy is adequate as Lisbeth Salander, although her performance doesn't feel as lived-in as Rooney Mara's and definitely not as Noomi Rapace's (who got way too little credit for it). We are well aware of Lisbeth's capability to stand her ground, and seeing her take on a bunch of henchmen incidentally is always a joy. But re-inventing her as an action hero was a mistake, because it takes away from what makes her most interesting: a woman with a brilliant intellect and survival skills, trapped inside an antisocial mindset.

A bigger victim is Sverrir Gudnason as Michael Blomkvist: a seasoned veteran and determined, complex man in the previous films, he has been reimagined as an insecure rookie, hardly getting anything more meaningful to do than advance the plot when the script calls for it; everything that could have rounded his character more (like the situation at his work, his relation with Lisbeth or his affaire with a colleague) is immediately cut short.

But the shortest end of the stick goes to my fellow Dutchie Sylvia Hoeks, who was an adequate bad girl in Blade Runner 2049. Here, her character gets a minimum of motivation and some Freudian flashbacks to justify a ridiculous scheme that hardly makes any sense. So much more could have been done with her character other than filling the role of one-dimensional Bond villain.

In all fairness, director Alvarez and his fellow screenwriters incidentally find the right tone. The first scene between Lisbeth and Michael is both appropriately awkward and visually appealing; there is a nice and suspenseful scene on a bridge, and an airport scene where the fast editing and Lisbeth's inventiveness are used to great effect. Lakeith Stanfield of Get Out fame has one of the more grateful roles as an American NSA agent who will either be a burden or a an asset, something that plays out quite satisfactorily. And despite overrelying on technology, the climax is well executed, and at least better than the almost laughable final confrontation.

To summarize, this reboot has its moments, but unfortunately turns out as an overproduced and too well-polished action-thriller, where a slow-paced, raw drama-thriller would have been more effective. Especially with such strong characters that we have come to love over the years. Let's hope that the reverse will happen here, and the Swedes re-adapt the book on their own terms in the future.