What is everyone's first reaction to hearing that a best-selling book is going to be made into a film?
"Shit, they're going to ruin it."
No one is ever really excited to hear that one of their favorite books is going to be a movie, through fear that it will be ruined, as countless novels and memoirs have been slaughtered. But, of course, there have also been brilliant adaptations like The Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants and Marley and Me. *cough*
More often than not, Hollywood adaptation of books (and books based on blogs) are rather dire. And now, they're taking on a new level of arrogance: remaking film adaptations of novels that have already been made in other countries.
Sure, Hollywood has been doing the American version of foreign films for years, for example everyone knows The Ring was a remake of the Japanese film Ringu, but thanks to the Internet and the western world's desperate need for information, foreign films really aren't that "foreign" any more.
And this is exactly why I cannot understand why Hollywood - more precisely David Fincher - thought it would be a smart idea to recreate The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo films. Part three of the films (The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest) is still in theatres in Europe, plus, the films were created recently (2009) and did really well. In fact, in North America alone The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo sold over $10 million in box office sales, and approximately $104,150,493 world wide.
So, not exactly a little art house film that no one had ever heard of.
Why in the world does Hollywood think the world needs Fincher and Steven Zaillian's take on the novels?
It's perplexing how anyone could think that after a wildly successful Swedish adaptation of three Swedish novels (about Swedish people and Swedish society and government IN SWEDEN) that an American director and screenwriter could have anything special to bring to the table.
Apparently the actors will be speaking in English with a Swedish accent in the film, but more than anything, everyone is wondering not so much about Daniel Craig playing investigative financial journalist Mikael Blomkvist, but how the hell perky-looking Rooney Mara is going to transform in to the hardcore, bad ass hacker Lisbeth Salander.
The first proper photographs of Mara as Salander have been revealed on the cover of W Magazine (above).
There Mara stands, her shirt pulled open to reveal a "Salander" tattoo across her chest, and a bit of cleavage, which, notably, in the first book, Salander did not have.
Her knuckles are covered in perfectly streaked dried blood for no apparent reason other than to show she's tough. And despite the heavy eye make-up, single lip piercing, pair of Tim Burton-esque earrings and a silly hipster haircut, Rooney Mara looks like she's dressed up as Lisbeth Salander for Halloween. Not as if she IS Lisbeth Salander, which is precisely how Noomi Rapace looks in the Swedish films. Rapace became Lisbeth Salander. And Mara more-so resembles a defiant suburban teenager desperately trying to show that she's, like, totally bad ass.
In W Magazine there's also a photo of Rooney sitting backwards on a chair, cigarette hanging lifelessly from her pale lips, having a tattooed bald man tattoo her ass.
Firstly - I can't remember Lisbeth getting tattooed on the ass in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Secondly, I'm still not buying it.
If Rooney and Fincher were smart, they would have kept Mara's transformation into Salander Top Secret. No photos until the promo posters, and even then, they should reveal as little as possible.
Curiosity surely would peak and people might be more inclined to go see the film, simply to see Mara as Salander. But after this horrific magazine cover, I'm not even sure I could stomach it.
Images © W Magazine