Millennium - Quello che non uccide

While David Lagercrantz did a decent job of preserving the "Milennium feel" in the book, this movie totally lost that. Only the first Swedish movie managed to give the feel that nothing important was left out from the book, here intentionally most of the book was left out to give room for car chases and fights. The result is a banal action movie where all persons are two-dimensional.

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.

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.

I feel the low rating currently (5.7) is probably because people are disappointed because it can't live up to its predecessor. And it's true, it can't... but in its own right it's still a good movie. Not excellent, but good. The story is okay, the action is solid, and Lisbeth is still badass. If you have the previous movie sitting in a shrine in your house somewhere and you worship it before you go to bed... skip this movie. If you just want an enjoyable if not terribly memorable action thriller, then go ahead and have fun.

A dull, nicely shot action thriller, if you love the Books (millenium trilogy) dont watch IT. Watch it on a Sunday's with a hangover and pizza.