David Fincher and Rooney Mara Talk THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO

by     Posted 1 year, 246 days ago

I still have reservations about The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. David Fincher is one of my favorite directors working today.  We’ve all seen that actress Rooney Mara has undergone a radical transformation to physically embody female protagonist Lisbeth Salander.  But the issue still remains: it’s not a good story.  It’s a standard mystery yarn but it has a stand-out character, and even Lisbeth doesn’t impress me much.  She’s a mish-mash of various ideas that don’t seem to add up to an actual person.  More than anything, she’s how a male author writes a strong woman: as if she had the personality of a man.

But in a recent interview, Fincher and Mara have helped to assuage some of my fears about the new adaptation.  The director and his star talk about the difficulties in adapting the best-selling novel, the casting process, and the story’s most brutal scene.  Hit the jump for more.  The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo co-stars Daniel Craig, and opens on December 21st.

girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-poster-01I’m glad that Fincher isn’t treating Steig Larsson’s novel like it’s a bible and that they must respect it at all costs:

“Look, there are parts of the book that I don’t love, and parts of it that make it a maddeningly difficult story to turn into a movie. We are walking in other people’s footsteps, and we have to be careful.” He is referring to the fact that a lot of people already love the Swedish film versions*. “I am a contrarian by nature, so all it does is make me want to take real risks. I am like, ‘If we are not out on the ledge juggling chain saws, then we are doing ourselves a huge disservice.’”

Mara points out that one element Fincher’s version will have over Niels Arden Oplev’s adaptation is that she looks much longer than Swedish star Noomi Rapace:

“One of the things that make our version that much more heartbreaking,” says Mara, “is that even though I am playing a 24-year-old, I look much younger. I look like a child.”

You may recall that the casting process went on for months as countless actresses vied to play Lisbeth.  However, Fincher had some unusual requests:

She mentions a time Fincher said, “Go out and get really, really drunk and come in the next morning so we can take pictures of you.” He wanted to show Sony that she could look strung out. “And I did it!” says Mara. “Threw up all night!”

Fincher added that he wasn’t just looking for great performances, but the look of his lead actress was also important.

“Look, we saw some amazing people. Scarlett Johansson was great. It was a great audition, I’m telling you. But the thing with Scarlett is, you can’t wait for her to take her clothes off.”

girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-movie-image-rooney-mara-01That may seem like an odd comment, but it makes sense if you know the story.  Stop here if you don’t want to be spoiled.

The most memorable scenes are the rape and revenge of Lisbeth Salander.  What Fincher means by “you can’t wait for her to take her clothes off,” is that Johansson is too sexy for the role.  You can’t be titillated by the rape and while I don’t think anyone would be, I can understand his perspective.

Fincher then walked Vogue’s interviewer Jonathan Van Meter through the lead-up to the Lisbeth’s rape by her parole officer:

“I think people generally don’t relish, sort of, evil fun,” he says. “They tend to think you are ghoulish if your interests run in that direction. But I don’t pretend for a moment to know what it’s really about. I know what I like about Hitchcock movies. I like that sense of uh-oooh.” He swivels around to his laptop and scrolls through a list of files on the screen, trying to decide what to show me first. We watch four or five random clips, coolly gorgeous, filled with dread, and set to a Trent Reznor score. Then he double-clicks on something and realizes that it is a rape scene and hits the stop button. “I’m not going to show you that,” he says. “That’s too heavy to drop anybody into. You gotta get there!” Scroll, scroll, double-click. “I’ll show you this,” he says. “It’s pretty heartbreaking.” It is the scene in which Salander goes to the office of her new social worker, Nils Bjurman, played with shuddersome menace by Yorick van Wageningen, and it slowly dawns on her that he is a monster who has total control over her money and her life. The scene is agonizing to watch as it slowly becomes apparent that he is going to sodomize her. Nothing is left to the imagination.”

And that’s where my reservations kick back in.  The way Van Meter describes the scene makes it sound exploitative.  It’s also a simplistic approach.  Her parole officer is an awful guy who is clearly going to rape her and that’s terrible.  But I can’t do anything with that.  There’s no subtext, and at least from the Van Meter’s description, there’s no nuance.

rooney-mara-the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-06But Fincher and Mara say that it’s not a simplistic revenge tale:

“It’s reductive to think of her that way. She’s not the Terminator. And you know, it’s not Dirty Harry, either. It’s way more feminine. Revenge is too easy.” Mara added, “Lisbeth lives by her own set of rules. She does the violent things she does for a reason, because it goes with her moral code.”

People who have read the book can help me out on this, but isn’t the gist of these scenes that Lisbeth gets raped and she rapes the guy right back?  Yes, it’s a moral code, specifically the Code of Hammurabi, but that moral code is revenge.  She’s not playing a long-game.  It’s simply an eye-for-an-eye, a rape-for-a-rape.  And narratively, it’s distracting and it really only relates to the larger story if you tie it back around to the larger message, “Harming women is bad.”

However, Fincher has earned my trust and hopefully The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo lives to this promise:

“I saw this not as a blockbuster that appeals to everyone,” says Fincher. “I saw this as an interesting, specific, pervy franchise. The only chance for something like Dragon Tattoo to be made in all of its perversions is to do it big. I think The Godfather is a pretty good fucking movie. You can start with a supermarket potboiler, but it doesn’t mean you can’t aim high.”

* Only Dragon Tattoo is the one people love.  Opinions become mixed-to-negative regarding the sequels The Girl Who Played with Fire and The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest.

Sponsored Content



Please Like Collider on Facebook

Tags:
, ,

Related Links:
«
»
Comments:
  • Patrick

    I feel this kind of “journalism” is worthless. The truth is, millions of people don’t care about weather or not you think this is a good story…I don’t know or care what led you to this postion of being an internet movie-buzz reporter, but David Fincher has directed some of the only masterpieces of our time and I would take the fact that he wanted to put years of his life into this movie over the fact that you don’t think it’s a “good story”. Report the news and leave the real movie journalism to someone who knows what they are talking about, because your personal insights are worthless and annoying.

    • aa

      Well, Fincher was the one who called it a “supermarket potboiler.” There are alternatives to opinionated blogs, like Variety or Deadline.

      Also, you’re looking in the wrong place for today’s Francois Truffaut. Start with Film Comment or some other more highbrow mag, or online stuff like Senses of Cinema or Rouge. Or, you know, Cahiers du Cinema. Today’s Pauline Kael is probably, dare I say it, Armond White–sometimes right on the money, most of the time infuriating. I know they’re very different, but my reaction to their stuff is similar.

      Why come to Collider looking for Cahiers-level stuff?

      • Patrick

        Thanks for your suggestions, clearly I was looking in the wrong spot. Page one on Film Comment, a fantastic interview with Cronenberg. Page one on Collider, another worthless picture from the filming of The Avengers! Look, they are in their costumes!!

      • ..

        Yaaaawn.

        I’m sure he wasn’t referring to TGWTDT as a supermarket potboiler – possibly has a little more respect for it than that. Haha.

        Also, Matt, when you post a response to criticism in “user comments” you can use your name, not just “aa” :)

      • aa

        And I didn’t mean to sound like I was putting down Collider. It’s an opinionated movie news blog. Film Comment is a sophisticated film criticism magazine. They’re apples and oranges.

        I don’t get the impression Matt Goldberg is trying to be a Great Film Critic. He’s just a guy voicing his opinion. And I happen to agree with it, for the most part.

        I agree, Bonobo, but I’m a little bit, perhaps wrongheadedly, more optimistic than you. Auteurs have been turning shit into gold for 100 years. I’m hoping for something not just better, but REALLY good. Probably too much to ask.

      • aa

        Oh and “..”, I’m not Matt Goldberg. And Fincher says this: “You can start with a supermarket potboiler, but it doesn’t mean you can’t aim high.”

    • Traffick02

      Patric, Collider is OPINIONATED JOURNALISM. It’s okay to be subjective while reporting–in fact, I prefer it for casual reading. In film, total objectivity can be highly problematic, because publications like IGN have to mask their opinions, thereby forcing themselves to act excited for movies they think will suck. Objective journalism makes it so people who are unfamiliar with the source material or respected filmmakers will have no accurate predictions on the film’s quality.

      I remember an author’s opinion of the Green Lantern comics months before the film release, and he claimed that the source mythology was far too complex and fantastical to make a solid Hollywood screenplay–an accurate prediction that publications like Entertainment Weekly don’t make.

      That being said, Collider (and Matt especially) needs to cut back on the pretentious claims. I can’t stand it when a journalist states his opinion as fact. Often they’ll write things such as “I don’t understand why Fincher wants to adapt such a terrible story…” This shit is highly problematic, even when its a ubiquitously accepted opinion.

      However, let me say I fully agree with Matt’s argument here: The bulk of “Dragon’s” narrative functions as a character study and is not driven by plot, so its Shyamalan-esque twists are highly ineffective, and the climax’s improbability contradicts the high realism achieved throughout.

      Matt should have reworded his claim and said how “he found it to be a poor story,” rather than stating the claim as fact, as that can seriously piss off fans of the respective source.

      But I personally WANT to read opinions of studio experts, because when I read about a film I’m highly anticipating, I always like to hear more than a factual piece of news, even if its an viewpoint I disagree with.

  • Patrick

    I am sure you are a terrific guy and you do great work, I apologize..I just miss the golden age of movie criticism and reporting, when the internet didn’t try to suck all the life and fun out of the movies. Everyone is entitled to their opinion of course.

    • Jay

      Patrick, you took the words from me! Exactly as I was thinking. And I don’t think you should apologise, particular bloggers on this site (Matt included) cannot just report on the facts when posting stories such as this. If it is a movie review then fine, include your opinion. I just wonder why it is necessary to include opinion (usually negative I must add – do these guys even enjoy film???) so often. I do enjoy coming to collider.com for the news, but my ass clenches when I see that news I might enjoy reading is written by Goldburg or Chitwood – and 9 times out of 10 I will move on. Admittedly AICN will include opinion also, though I happen to respect their opinion but Goldburg & Chitwood you are just plain hacks, no doubt about it.

      • Gerberzy

        I agree, I like this site for the news but Goldburg is annoying as hell. Stick with the news. PEOPLE DON’T COME TO YOUR SITE BECAUSE YOUR WITTY OPINIONS, ALL THEY WANT IS THE NEWS, MAN!

  • Frank

    I have to agree. Matt you’re probably a nice guy, but when you make comments like “standard mystery yarn” etc., it makes me cringe a bit. I think if you could do better, you would be more than a blogger. You’d be a filmmaker.

  • Pingback: ‘Dragon Tattoo’ director talks about nearly casting Scarlett Johansson – msnbc.com | Breaking Right Now - Daily News Magazine

  • Patrick

    It just seems to me we are missing something in film criticism today and that is a serious mature approach to the art itself. I do enjoy this site for the sheer amount of information they put out about upcoming films and projects and so on, because that interests me. What makes me the most upset in this internet age of film coverage is that no one seems to take it seriously, save for a few exceptional writers. You have all these fascinating filmmakers out there and no one seems to be asking the right questions. We need a Pauline Kael or a Francois Truffaut in the world more than ever, not just to articulate how terrible most of the films have gotten over the years, but to give the respect and attention people like David Fincher or The Coens truly deserve. Why are there no riveting conversations with Lars von Trier about anything but his publicity? Reactions to the Tree of Life were rightfully quite divided, but why did I get the feeling that our sarcastic and quick witted generation just didn’t have the time to stop and digest it? I have seen it only once and it’s beauty and scope confounds me months after my single viewing. That film and Melancholia in the same year, and no one is trying to get a dialouge between Terrence Malik and Lars Von Trier? I know Mr. Malik doesn’t do interviews, but i’m just trying to make a point that so much more could be done in our world of film today to preserve our prized filmmakers.

  • Pingback: ‘Dragon Tattoo’ director talks about nearly casting Scarlett Johansson – msnbc.com

  • Eddy

    I hate that Goldberg has to take a cynical approach to ALL film news and not just report. It seems like he would be the stereotypical “blogger” who sits behind a computer and laughs at his own snarky bullshit.

  • G

    Once again…and to echo other comments….Matt Goldberg shouldn’t be covering this movie. This isn’t exactly Twilight…a lot of people love this book and for good reason.

  • Frank

    “…even Lisbeth doesn’t impress me much. She’s a mish-mash of various ideas that don’t seem to add up to an actual person. More than anything, she’s how a male author writes a strong woman: as if she had the personality of a man.”

    This is remarkable. Really, I reread this and I’m amazed because almost universally, this character has been well-received. I really would like to know how Matt would have written it.

  • Pingback: David Fincher And Rooney Mara Dish On GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO | The Reel Scoop

  • Patricia

    Let me understand: the author of this text disses the movie without seeing it, just reporting on another writer’s text. Is this journalism? Since when?

    Another observation: the author comments on a pivotal scene of the book without even reading it. Really? And talking about moral codes, I wonder if he ever saw Dexter. Does he consider Harry’s Code as mere revenge? Lisbeth has her own verson of Harry’s Code, created by herself.

    And that excerpt made me laugh out loud:

    “…even Lisbeth doesn’t impress me much. She’s a mish-mash of various ideas that don’t seem to add up to an actual person. More than anything, she’s how a male author writes a strong woman: as if she had the personality of a man.”

    If this is true, can anyone explain to me how so many women (me included) relate to Lisbeth?

  • Bonobo

    Lisbet was not as universally well-received as Transformers, the forth Pirates flick or the Smurfs movie – all you guys need to stop basing every argument against Goldberg on this ad populum fallacy, especially when most of you are smart enough to see that many of your own deeply held opinions could be undermined in the very same way by any philistine ten-year old who appropriates everything the culture throws at him into his character.

    Kael, Truffaut, Bazin etc. did not give a shit what people in general felt about the latest Bresson, Hawks or Hitchcock film – And they sure as hell weren’t always nice and constructive when voicing what they felt was lacking.

    But maybe I’m just defending him because I happen to agree about these books; disjointed, cliched murder mysteries with a crudely overt and depressingly scandinavian socio-political angle, blessed with an interesting title character who feels fresh and unique because she’s basically a superhero who’s been smuggled into a very drab, mundane world (this is what the english language publishers realized when they renamed the book). Lisbet is cool, but like most superheros she’s more a set of skills and abilities and badass poses, than a fully fledged character – and why Larsson had her vying for page-space with the insufferably dull and traditional co-protagonist Blomkvist is beyond me.

    All that being said, I’m certain Fincher can and will do way better than the Swedish original (that only had Noomi Rapace going for it), and a pseudo-superhero flick from Fincher will always be a decent time at the movies, even though any trace of it might dissipate the moment you step out of the theater.

  • Brian

    You’re out of your mind if you don’t think The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is a great story. And your critique that Lisbeth Salander isn’t a realistic portrait of a female character doesn’t make much sense either, particularly coming from you… a man, criticizing the writing of another man, as if you had a place to even make that criticism; I personally don’t understand that criticism, and none of the many female friends I have who love the book and love the character hold your opinion or would agree with it.

    That said, I do agree with one part of your sentiment… and that’s how this film seems completely unwarranted. The book itself, and the original film directed by Niels Arden Oplev and featuring an amazing performance by Noomi Rapace that can’t be topped, are both so brilliant that this additional version is totally unnecessary. The best they can really hope to do is succeed as well as the original.

    However, I do understand that enough “dumb Amurricans” who refuse to watch a foreign film because they’re too lazy or stupid to read subtitles makes it a possibly rewarding financial investment for the production company. And putting Fincher on it and having him lend his touch to yet another mystery/detective/killer film is certainly going to pull in the cineastes, as well as hopefully the mainstream audiences. And I love Fincher as well, so I’ll be there as well to watch his completely unnecessary remake.

    But… here’s the part where the real possibility lies. Because as brilliant as the first book is, and as well as it was adapted the first time around, both of the following books are far less entertaining and tightly structured. And the film adaptations for those two books, directed by another director and not Oplev, were fairly dreadful. So where Fincher can really pull off a success story is if he manages to elevate the material he’s working with for The Girl Who Played with Fire and The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest and turn them into decent films. And there’s no doubt in my mind that if there’s a director out there who can “save” the second and third books and turn them into worthwhile films, it’s Fincher. So here’s hoping that he crafts a compelling trilogy, and delivers more than the easy slam-dunk of Dragon Tattoo.

    • Bonobo

      Oh come on, saying that Lisbet is written like a man is not something Goldberg’s grabbed from thin air: she’s violent, a computer nerd, rides motorcycles, her youthful angst manifests it self as rage (as opposed to apathy/coolness), she casually fucks girls and likes to keep an emotional distance when she does sleep with someone more than once – these would all be considered traditionally (stereotypically) male attitudes/interests/states.

      Gender is not the deciding, or even an important, factor when claiming that a work is colored by the uncritical oversights or sexist prejudices of the author; a familiarity with and sensitivity for the sexist stereotypes of our times and what constitutes uncritical, reinforcing and non-satirical employment of them, is.

      That said, I don’t think you can write Lisbet off as just another manifestation of the age old male fantasy of a male brain in a female body, if only, and somewhat paradoxically, because she’s portrayed as boyish and not all that pretty. She seems to have started out as such a fantasy though, that was somewhat artificially corrected, but now I’m just guessing at a dead man’s thoughts without much to base it on…

  • Old Soldier

    How’s this for criticism, Aliens: Great story great movie! Alien 3 bad story bad movie. So in the next two books is he going to stay true to the story or is he going to kill all the characters you fell in love with in the first book?
    “Whaaaaa… but it’s Fincher!”

  • mark tornits

    i really don’t care if you have”reservations” for a movie that isn’t even out yet-

    just seems like a waste of time to talk about “reservations” you have in your head that aren’t related to the film at all-

    lets just wait for the movie before judging it…. no?

  • Sandie

    To .Matt Goldberg: I have a feeling that 90% of your critics on this article have never read the books and are just Fincher fanboys/girls hurt that you dare to say something negative about their god’s next film. *I* have read all three books and I couldn’t agree with you and Fincher more. They are standard supermarket pop fiction mystery stuff. What is special is that there is a lot of rape porn.

    Lisbeth rapes the man who rapes her in an eye for an eye direct style, it’s pure revenge. Lisbeth does not read like a believable real person. She gets brutally raped twice, the second time all night long in every orifice. Yet apart from feeling bad the next day, she suffers no long term emotional trauma from it. Other women in the books also have rape histories and none of them have any issues with intimacy. I have worked at a woman’s shelter with rape victims, trust me the emotional scars these women suffer from are huge. This book’s depiction of women is pure fantasy and something only a man would write.

    I think it’s refreshing that you continue to state your honest opionions. I’m sure many Collider readers appreciate it. Other sites are all about worshiping anything dealing with David Fincher without ever questioning what they are writing. He can feed them bird droppings for lunch and they will ask for more. It’s a huge army of media sheep.

    • micoy

      Sandie: THANK YOU!

  • Matt

    Don’t change Goldberg. I always enjoy reading the butthurt comments that come with your posts.

  • Stephens

    I just don’t understand why every time you post a story about this book/movie you have to constantly bring up the fact that you don’t like it. WE GET IT. Just give us the interview without your commentary for once, it’d save everyone a ton of time.

  • billyjean

    “Mara points out that one element Fincher’s version will have over Niels Arden Oplev’s adaptation is that she looks much longer than Swedish star Noomi Rapace:”

    i think there’s a typo there. change “longer” to “younger”

  • Pi

    and Matt Goldberg will just ignore your comments and display his cynicism again in the next news.

    is there a collider police to talk to him about his Attitude Problem? i mean, seriously, something’s wrong with the guy.

    be a filmmaker Matt if you hate movies so much and knows HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE. there is just no joy in you when talking about movies. always nitpicking even the greatest of movies.

  • Hertz

    My two cents

    Cracked is an excellent source for movies. The stories are interesting and it is updated frequently. However, like others have said, the writers personal comments are annoying, arrogant, and sometimes straight up disrespectful to films they haven’t seen yet. It is simply unprofessional and over shadows the great stories you run. Sometimes I wonder how you are able to get exclusive interviews considering how most of these editorial “opinions” you have are so immature and unnecessary.

    Matt, you guys always tell us to post in the comment section. We know you read this. I think you owe it to us to give us some response instead of pretending you haven’t seen this. I could actually care less as to whether or not Matt responds or if anyone agrees me. Im just trying to give some feedback to a site I frequently visit and enjoy as a film fan

    • Hertz

      God dammit, spending too much time on cracked.com haha Meant collider obviously

  • Bo

    Collider is a good web-site because it’s loaded with information about films, etc. It’s horrible in all aspects of opinions given about said films. This Matt guy…man oh man…nothing to be said except that he appears to be a complete moron over and over. It’s maddening to see a guy make a statement that it’s not a good story. That is just his opinion, yet he states it as fact. An indication of a complete lack of intelligence. And the most amazing part of this is that Matt hasn’t even read the story. And he continues to babble on and on about this story and film and he stiff refuses to read it for himself. This guy doesn’t warrent any serious time and just goes to show you how wacky this world and the people in it are. Which, by the way, is one of the points of the books and films!! Of course he doesn’t get it…he’s misinformed; refuses to take responsibilty and inform himself first hand and is what the original writer was writing about in the first place. Wacky, wacky world filled with morons like Matt. Yet, yet…it goes on and he will to for who knows how long…until the film comes and goes. Will Matt even go see the film? Wierd, wierd stuff Matt. Your a wierd, wierd cat my man!! Thanks for the chuckles. Good film web-site though. Wierd, eh?

  • Vinícius

    Well, I personally think the second book is the best in the trilogy, so I’m looking forward to what Fincher will do with it.

    And, although I love the books, I kinda think they are a bit of a drag in some parts. The story in the first one is very compelling, but the ending is kinda disapointing. It’s not bad, it’s just OK.

    The reason I prefer the second book is because it really “fleshes out” Lisbeth’s character more. It gives a lot of insight into her past and since you spend more time with her than Blomkvist, you get a better understanding of her personality and her moral code. I personally think she is a great character and that is why I became a fan of the series.

  • John

    This first part is directed at Sandie and others. Did you actually read the books? Hmmm. I seriously doubt it. I really do. Lisbeth does not just simply revenge-rape her new legal guardian. What she does is her only way of gaining her freedom and identity as an individual back from Him and a society and the system that has failed her since she was a child. She is a pro-active survivor. Most survivors bury their traumas to operate and survive, to say they don’t is churlish. Many victims play Victim because that’s all they know or because they can’t move on. its sad but true. It is also mentioned in the books a few times that Lisbeth possibly suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome. She’s a complex character. A complex FEMALE character that millions of women around the world believe to be so. I would also like to point out that Larsson did write the books with his long-term girlfriend and did admit that she wrote much on Lisbeth’s character, it’s not just some male fantasy. She has also got the rights to the 4th novel and has apparantly finished that herself- which I doubt will see the light of day until Fincher completes the third film. So this male fantasy stuff projected onto a woman is just a generalised lazy thought process. The superhero aspect of her character is the fact she dwells outside of society with her own rules and moral codes, like most of us would probably like to do if we only knew how or were brave enough. THAT’S the fantasy.

    That journalist who reviews a film that’s not been released, negatively, has read the books and disliked them and watched a foreign version of the film and not liked it, is surely not best equipped to review the film. Why would he even want to? What’s behind the negativity? I’m sure Lisbeth would even raise an eyebrow at his inclusion. Hahaha

    But that’s the way it goes. I’m sure there’s a whole host of mainstream journo’s, reviewers, columnists and commentators who will simply view Dragon Tattoo and Lisbeth as pinko-freak-flag-flying-radical-neo-punk-nonsense because it suits their narrow-minded agenda and would hope to divert others from drifting toward it. And how many movie-going-folk simply say ‘I hear its not too good’ because of some half-assed buzz-comments surrounding a film, like from our journalist friend above. And the snowball effect takes hold. But that’s the way it goes. It is what it is in our sometimes depressing society.

    I loved the books. I quite enjoyed the Swedish films, though was slightly disappointed that it sacrified many of the books socio-political strands for straigght-up murder-mystery and that Lisbeth’s character seemed to be the only real fleshed-out character – but I’m sure Fincher will knock this movie trilogy out of the park. I’m sure millions of fans of the books are glad he is onboard too.

  • tattoo websites

    Hello, Neat post. There’s a problem with your site in internet explorer, could test this? IE nonetheless is the marketplace leader and a good component to other folks will leave out your magnificent writing due to this problem.

Features

Demand Media Entertainment

Click Here