THE GIRL WHO KICKED THE HORNETS NEST



 The hornet's nest is a metaphor, unlike the previous film's title The Girl Who Played With Fire. The third and concluding film to the trilogy is better than ‘Fire’, but never matches the intensity and chemistry we saw in ‘Tattoo’. As Hollywood races to film their versions of these Swedish blockbusters, helmed by David Fincher (The Social Network), there are still many Americans who are clueless about this trilogy. I think Fincher’s take on these movies will be vastly different and more edgy; the two latter films deal with drugs significantly and had long bits of boring scenes and dialogue. 

 We last saw Lisbeth (Noomi Rapace) being taken to the hospital, followed by jail after she was arrested for the murder of three people and attempted murder of her own father. As she recovers from being shot in the head, her good friend and Millennium newspaper editor Mikael Blomkvist (Michael Nyqvist) must once again help her from afar. He will gather evidence to prove her innocence while risking his own life and the lives of his staff. Those who have sought to destroy the dragon tattooed girl will now stop at nothing to silence her story in the court room and prevent the article from being published in time for her trial. 

 The change in directors marked the big change in these films, as the second and third films based on the books of the same titles were directed by Daniel Alfredson. The first film captured more of the narrative and movement of the story, while this film is more about the events leading up to a brief courtroom scene that closes out the trilogy. The mystery and suspense of the first film set viewers up for that kind of pace and, while ‘Hornets Nest’ certainly has its suspenseful moments, they are scattered throughout the two and a half hour film. The chemistry between Lisbeth and Mikael is only found in one final scene of the film. 

 What could have made this film in particular more interesting is the creativity in telling the story. Editing techniques, locations, and especially the cinematography is nothing impressive. Even a dull story, which this is not, can be made interesting through mastered elements. In the beginning, when these films garnered such international acclaim, I thought Hollywood's decision to remake them for American audiences was in bad taste.  However, now I think this material might do far better under a director like Fincher, who is one of the most skilled directors when it comes to technical elements and in less than a month will have a best director Oscar to back that claim up. 

 Final Thought – It gets the job done, but just barely, lacks intensity.

 

Grade C+


By: Dustin Chase W.


Editor: Michael Woody