The Girl Who Kicked The Hornet’s Nest is an excellent film and you really should see it but there are several reasons why the idea of doing so may not yet have crossed your mind.
As you’re probably already aware it’s based on the final book of the late Stieg Larsson’s Millennium Trilogy which I know has become quite a significant literary landmark for the simple reason that firstly my wife read them all in quick succession and secondly I see posters at stations in London describing assorted new books that I’ve never heard of as being by “The next Stieg Larsson”.
As someone who has a lifelong aversion to hype the whole thing has quite consciously passed me by because I’ve lived through the reading fads of commuters before, the recent origins of which can probably be traced back to the time where every other person on the train seemed to be reading “Captain Corelli’s Mandolin” before moving on to “Bridget Jones’s Diary”, and so on.
So bearing in mind that “Go against the flow” could, quite arguably, be my motto it fell to me, as someone who’s neither read the Millennium books or seen the previous films, to review this one. The challenge was going to be whether I could understand what the film was about without that background or whether would it be like trying to watch the latest Harry Potter film without having ever reading the books or seeing the films? In Swedish.
Ah yes. You might have read my recent report here on HeyUGuys about the comments made by Niels Arden Oplev against the Hollywoodisation of the first film, “The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo”, which he directed and I would paraphrase his comments as “Why do you need a remake in English when you have an original in Swedish with fabulous Swedish actors such as Noomi Rapace?”. Good point. Stick with me and I’ll get to it. I really will.
Before then I need to provide some spoilers so be warned. The film starts with some brief and bloody flashbacks to get you up to speed with the current situation and then introduces the Terminator-esque unstoppable hitman Niedermann (Micke Spreitz). Actually scratch that analogy as he more closely reminds me of a blonde-haired take on Javier Bardem’s character in “No Country For Old Men”. The action moves quickly on and the first half of the film revolves around the trilogy’s main character, Lisbeth Salander (Noomi Rapace), in hospital recovering from the events shown in the flashbacks and the second half is about her subsequent trial and its momentous outcome. All this time Mikael Blomkvist (Michael Nyqvist) is working in the background to establish the truth behind the circumstances in which Lisbeth found herself and the opposition he finds from those with vested interests who have worked hard to conceal it.
Noomi Rapace does do a fabulous job as Lisbeth Salander and has the ability to communicate so much through both her words and, more often, her sullen silence. Her transformation for the courtroom scenes is absolutely startling and serves to express the iron will of her character that has mostly been kept in check while in hospital. Although she is the main character of the trilogy the biggest character in this movie, for me at least, is Mikael Blomkvist who doggedly sticks to his task, perhaps you could say he even wears it as more of a calling, and does everything within his power to expose the injustice that has been perpetrated against Lisbeth. For those who, like me, had no idea of, or preconceptions about, the characters I’d say that the nearest comparison would be “Inspector Morse meets Wallander” and although he isn’t a policeman he has that kind of rigour and purpose about him that we’d like to think that all police should have mixed with a sense of aloneness that suits someone who works for a publication such as the one depicted in the film.
It’s a great film of good against evil, about justice prevailing over injustice, about the underdogs against the machine and if you have any liking for that sort of film then this is for and you please go out and see it in the cinema rather than opting for the small screen experience, for reasons you’ll find explained in a couple of paragraphs time.
Now for the tricky bit. It is, as I’ve mentioned before, in Swedish and some of you may have an issue with that. Please, whatever you do don’t get hung up on it being in Swedish with English subtitles as the experience it gives you is far more than you can imagine. If English is your first, and perhaps only, language and you live and/or work in a primarily English-speaking environment the prospect of watching a subtitled film may confuse you. You might be thinking “If it’s that good why isn’t it in English?” or “I’ll wait for the Hollywood version” but my opinion is that if you really want to enter into and experience the full “difference” of the world depicted in the books and the people who live in it then to my mind the only way you can do that is to see the original Swedish. Sorry, but it is.
If you haven’t already headbutted your computer in the hope of doing me some serious injury after that last statement then let me explain it. In the cinema there was laughter, there were gasps and even cheers as the film went on because the subtitles combined with the action on the screen really brought out the tension of the story and the applause from the audience at the end cemented my view that this is a film that has really been fabulously well done. Language really is no barrier to a great film.
I can’t speak of it as a book to film translation or even how it fits into the trilogy of films but as a work in itself I’m happy to give it my seal of approval. And at the very least you’ll learn the Swedish for “Thank you”.
