"The Lone Ranger" opened July 3 to universally lukewarm reviews. There have been many criticisms, not the least of which is that a lot of the material is a rehash, including the aging Tonto (Johnny Depp) telling the story much like Dustin Hoffman did in "Little Big Man" years ago. I don't really get all of the negativity. We went to the movie expecting an off-beat, summer blockbuster. We thought we would see an action packed and entertaining movie, and we did. We didn't go expecting "Citizen Kane" or a documentary on genocide of native Americans. We went to be entertained and that we were.
I watched all of The Lone Ranger TV shows as a kid. I had a mask, a white hat and could holler "Hi Ho, Silver" with the best of them. I'm a a fan. So, I was excited that this story was being reprised as a major motion picture. When I learned that Johnny Depp was cast as Tonto, my excited anticipation went up a notch.. I don't know much about Armie Hammer, but he certainly looked like he would be a good Lone Ranger. Knowing that Depp would dominate the movie made me wonder how this story would work from Tonto's point of view. Well, I think it worked great.
The writers were able to tell the familiar story of the survival of Texas Ranger John Reid and how he was transformed from a legalistic, non-violent academic into a gun-toting vigilante. The writers were able to weld on a plausible back-story for Tonto as well. The plot becomes a bit convoluted as these two back stories are woven into a new story of greed and deceit perpetrated by the new Trans-continental railroad. I think the whole thing worked, although other reviewers thought the plot a bit unwieldy. A lot of the criticisms I have read was that the movie was "choppy" or uneven. I think that the writers' ambition to tell multiple stories is responsible for that.
Johnny Depp does indeed dominate the movie, and his interpretation of Tonto is certainly different from Jay Silverheels' in the 1950s. There is reference genocide of Native Americans but that is not the main thrust of the movie. Depp does not just take Jack Sparrow to the 1800s. He definitely creates a unique, conflicted and, yes, humorous Tonto.
The final twenty minutes of the movie, though are the highlight. The final action sequence, featuring runaway trains, exploding bridges, the Lone Ranger riding Silver along the top of a train and a fitting outcome for all of the "good guys" as well as the "bad guys" brings the movie to a very thrilling conclusion and made me want to know when the sequel would be released.
Reality was suspended for 2+ hours, I was entertained and thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Isn't that what summer movies are supposed to do?
Distributed by Touchstone Pictures, 20th Century Fox, Dreamworks Pictures,
Participant Median and Relliance Entertainment
Theatrical Relase Date: November 9, 2012
At the risk of sounding un-American or racist, this movie is a snoozefest. It's a bit like looking at a 150 year old broadcast of C-SPAN.
The plot concerns the passage of the 13th Amendment. That's it. Lincoln is a recently re-elected second term President, mired in an unpopular war and fighting a partisan fight to pass the constitutional amendment which would guarantee the abolition of slavery. The same political gridlock and Congressional shenanigans plaguing 21st Century Washington D.C. are at play here.
Daniel Day-Lewis is absolutely incredible in his portrayal of Abraham Lincoln. After a while, though, the masterful performance becomes lost in the story which moves at glacial speed. Some of the other casting is a bit suspect. This particularly applies to Sally Field as Mary Todd Lincoln who plays this role like the 19 the century version of Forest Gump's mother.
It was fun to see many familiar sights from the Richmond and Petersburg, Virginia areas where the movie was filmed. The Virginia State Capitol is transformed into the U.S. Capitol and the old Petersburg train station is featured in several early scenes.
This movie is about a very important historical achievement by probably our most effective and revered President. It probably won't rate as one of Hollywood or Spielberg's greatest accomplishments because of the pacing and long tedious scenes dominated by dialogue and political rhetoric. If you go, I'd suggest a stop at Starbuck's for a double Cafe Americano first.
Addiction does not discriminate. It does not care what color you are, what religion, what socioeconomic group you represent or what occupation you may have. Addiction makes honest people into liars, sane people delusional and successful people into convicts. It is that potent.
Addiction also has the ability to make people use their friends and loved ones to fuel its desires and needs. Addicted persons quickly divide their loved ones into groups of enablers and enemies. The person who is unfortunate enough to fall prey to this disease will use anyone and everyone to fulfill his or her own needs, often to the humiliation and disappointment of family, friends, co-workers and, at times, even perfect strangers. The disease saps the afflicted of even the basic reasons for living, turning life into and obsessive search for the next drink or fix. Contrary to some popular opinion, addition is not a sign of "weakness" or personality defect. It is a disease with genetic and social origins and consequences.
All of this behavior is perfectly on display in "Flight", the story of an alcoholic commercial airline pilot who miraculously lands a defective plane, saving the lives of the majority of people on board. The pilot is Whip Whitaker who is portrayed magnificently by Denzel Washington. Whitaker is initially hailed as a hero but quickly turns villain when it is learned that blood toxicology tests taken at the crash site revealed him to be heavily under the influence of drugs and alcohol. The majority of the movie shows us Whip's desperate attempts to control his addiction while trying to salvage his reputation and career. The wide ranging ripple effect of an individual's addiction is very dramatically and realistically shown in Whip's co-workers, life-long friends and, first and foremost, in his family.
This movie is very well done and joins a group of important and honest portrayals of addiction. The crowd reaction was interesting. During several scenes there was inappropriate laughter. I can only figure that this came from the public's discomfort with the thought of a functioning professional being addicted to drugs and alcohol. People aren't used to thinking of their pilot, their judge or their doctor suffering from addiction.
This is a very well done movie and the acting by the entire cast is exceptional, led by the sterling performance by Denzel Washington.
Argo is a remarkable true story about a dramatic rescue of six Americans during the Iran Hostage Crisis in 1979 and 1980. Ben Affleck directed this tight drama and also stars as Tony Mendez, a CIA specialist in "exfiltration" (removing people from hostile environments).
The movie opens with a fairly brief summary of the political and historical background which precipitated the Iranian takeover of the U.S Embassy in Teheran. The Iranians, under the leadership of the Ayatollah Khomeni, held fifty two Americans hostage. They demanded the return of the deposed Shah of Iran who, suffering from lymphoma, had obtained political asylum in the United States. Six Americans escaped the embassy during the takeover and hid in the home of the Canadian ambassador.
Multiple plans to remove the six isolated hostages were constructed and discarded and finally, in desperation, the CIA turns to Mendez. He devises an outlandish plot to enter Iran and leave with the six hostages, all posing as a group of Canadians planning to film a "Star Wars" knock-off movie in Iran. The story moves to Hollywood where Mendez (Affleck) enlists the aid of renowned make-up artist John Chambers (played by John Goodman) and producer Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin) to aid in the ruse. The audacious plan goes through multiple levels of review, including President Carter and his chief of staff Hamilton Jordan (Kyle Chandler). The political implications of success vs. failure play heavily in the discussions.
The movie balances the absolute terror of the hostage situation with humor and the total absurdity of the plan to rescue them. Alan Arkin is terrific, injecting levity and irony into the nearly impossible situation. There is also a cinematic balance between the beauty of the city of Teheran and the surrounding Iranian mountains and the horror of the terrorist acts of the Revolutionary Guard. The movie makers have also re-created the look of the late seventies complete with the large eye glasses, the wide lapels and tight jeans. The soundtrack also lends authenticity to the setting of the era.
"Argo", though, is really the story of Tony Mendez and his tremendous heroism and bravery. This is a story about prioritizing the safety of others above your own and doing the right thing. It is a story of a brave and principled man who completes his mission against enormous odds and at great risk to his own safety and well-being. The courage this man displays is unbelievable. The skill with which Ben Affleck brings this character to the screen is equally incredible. Affleck's performances (both as actor and director) are Oscar-worthy.
I was a young adult during this time period, trying to survive the first years of my surgical residency. I remember the Iran Hostage Crisis and the impotence that America felt as the situation dragged on for 444 days. I remember the harsh criticisms of Jimmy Carter and his seeming reluctance to do anything to resolve the crisis, even as this clandestine operation was in place. The criticism of Carter reached new heights when an attempted military hostage rescue resulted in the loss of eight American servicemen and two aircraft in the Iranian dessert. Carter's loss to Ronald Reagan in the 1980 presidential election was largely blamed on his perceived lack of leadership during this time. The hostages were released one hour after Reagan's inauguration. The film casts new light on the political decision making and behind the scenes actions that were, in fact, taking place.
"Argo" is a fantastic film, a fascinating recreation of the time period and is also a critically important history lesson. I recommend it highly.
Political satire has existed at least since the time of Aristophanes (446 B.B.) and takes many forms. Cartoons, novels, newspaper and magazine commentary as well as television and film programming have all been used for this purpose. In recent decades "Saturday Night Live" has successfully lampooned presidential candidates and other politicians with memorable skits involving Chevy Chase as Gerald Ford, Dana Carvey as George H.W. Bush and Ross Perot and Will Ferrell as George W. Bush, among others. "The Campaign" does not target any one particular individual, but instead lambasts the entire political process.
This movie is as zany as you might expect from the pairing of Will Ferrell and Zach Galifianakos. The story line features Ferrell as incumbent Cam Brady, a U.S. Representative from the 14th District of North Carolina. Cam is the quintessential airhead with "a $900 haircut" who Ferrell portrays as a combination of his George W. Bush impersonation and his Ricky Bobby character from "Talladega Nights." Brady is running unopposed until his tawdry affair with a model is exposed. He made the egregious error of placing an obscene phone call to his mistress which unfortunately, thanks to a misdial, ends up on the message machine of an evangelical Christian family. A pair of unscrupulous businessmen (Dan Akroyd and John Lithgow) want to elect more candidates who will endorse their profitable Chinese manufacturing enterprise and draft Buddy Huggins, the "odd" son of an associate living in North Carolina (Galifianakos) to run against the now seemingly vulnerable Cam Brady. The campaign quickly spirals down to mud-slinging, name calling exaggerations from both sides. There are some truly funny moments such as when Brady can't remember the words to the Lord's Prayer during a debate. Brady then deflects attention from that miscue by accusing Huggins of being a Communist because of his two pug dogs. ("Those dogs are Chinese, people. Chinese!"). Brady's tawdry affair is exploited to the max and he also is arrested for driving under the influence. The movie also successfully lampoons the media and the reliance on polling numbers. Marty receives a "two point bump in the polls" after he shoots Brady in the leg during a hunting "accident." Brady's sex tape promotional advertisement "tests well with men." Predictably, the movie includes a lot of crude humor and foul language. The movie also drags a bit and seems like a "Saturday Night Live" skit that just goes on too long. As slap-stick comedy "The Campaign" is successful, but as meaningful political satire it just isn't. I enjoyed it and would go to see it again. If you go to see "The Campaign" though, don't expect a comedy classic.
This movie Is a dark, atmospheric imagining of the mysterious last three days
in the life of Edgar Allan Poe. The
known facts of Poe’s final days are included in the plot. Poe was indeed found incoherent on a park
bench in Baltimore, was brought to a hospital babbling and screaming about “Reynolds”
and died of unknown causes. The fact
that he was found in someone else’s clothes was not in the movie. The fact that
he was living in Richmond at the time of his death and only visiting Baltimore
was ignored as well. Poe is presented in
“The Raven” as a romantically involved and functioning artist. His money struggles are documented, but he
seems to have escaped the melancholy which actually plagued him for the remainder
of his days following his wife’s death from tuberculosis. He is shown here as blocked creatively but
still a espected writer. The plot of “The
Raven” connects Poe’s demise with a demonic serial killer who commits murders
copied from Poe’s fiction.
The casting of John Cusack as Poe is an interesting
choice. He actually looks much like Poe’s
photographic image, but his demeanor doesn’t really match the anguished,
tortured persona that has come to surround the legend. Cusack’s Poe never passes up an opportunity
for a drink, but also never seems out of control or senseless. The hypothesis that Poe was engaged in
another deep romantic relationship at age 40 doesn’t really fit the historical
picture of the reeling, drug and alcohol fueled neurotic which history tells us
Poe had become.
The movie has some resemblance to the recent Sherlock Holmes
series. The basic plot line of a pair of
investigators (in this case Poe and Baltimore Police Detective Fields) trying
to follow a series of diabolical clues left by a brilliant but mad
murderer. The addition here of all of
the literary references makes this movie more interesting. The loose portrayal of historical fact,
however, detracts from the overall story.
For a Poe fanatic such as myself, this was an enjoyable,
although flawed movie. Fans of horror
movies and the recent Sherlock Holmes stories should enjoy it as well. As a historical document it is inaccurate in many respects, but it
is good entertainment.
The new American version of the first installment of Stieg Larsson’s “Millenium Trilogy” is very, very good. For those who don’t know the story, a discredited journalist named Mikael Blomqvist is hired by Henrick Vanger, a wealthy Swedish family patriarch, to solve the decades old disappearance and presumed death of his beloved niece, Harriet Vanger. Harriet disappeared as a sixteen year old on the same day that a truck accident blocked the only bridge leading off of the island which contains the family compound. Her body was never found. The only lingering clues are framed wildflowers which are sent annually to Henrik, presumably by the girl’s killer. Mikael enlists the aid of Lisbeth Salander, the girl of the title, an ace researcher who can get around any computer security encryption. Lisbeth is a deeply troubled young woman prone to violence, revenge, bisexuality, body piercing and tattoos. Mikael’s search for the long lost niece uncovers a probable serial killer, most likely one of the Vangers, but which one? Several of the uncles were Nazi sympathizers and all of the Vangers have issues, either with alcohol, anti-Semitism or anti-social behavior. Eventually Mikael and Lisbeth independently identify the culprit, ableit nearly too late to save Mikael’s life. The solution to the fate of Harriet Vanger is revealed, although simplified in this version of the story.
David Fincher's "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" has many strengths. The casting is brilliant. I thought that Daniel Craig would be a bit too macho to portray Mikael, but this former James Bond displays enough wariness, uncertainty and even fear to be convincing. Rooney Mara is superb as Lisbeth, portraying the character’s twin natures: vulnerable waif and vengeful control freak. The supporting cast is excellent also, particularly Chritopher Plummer as Henrik Vanger.
The cinematography adds to the general creepiness of the story. The snowy landscapes of the Vanger estate make you feel at times like you are watching a black and white Hitchcock film rather than a modern blockbuster. The city-scapes are also draped in winter drab, adding to the somber atmosphere.
The highlight of the film, though, may be the opening credits, played over a heavy metal remake of Led Zeppelin’s classic “Immigrant Song” which was director David Fincher’s idea brought to life by Nine Inch Nails front man Trent Reznor. This American movie is very similar to the Swedish version, although the lack of subtitles is a definite plus for this one. Rooney Mara’s interpretation of Lisbeth Salander is different from Noomi Rapace’s, but not necessarily better. I thought Mara’s occasional humorous moments helped the character seem more real.
This is not a movie for the faint of heart, however. The violent rape scenes are disturbing and the photos of the serial killer's victims which Mikael and Lisbeth uncover are equally difficult to view.
All in all, though, this is a very good rendition of Steig Larsson’s haunting story.
(Blogger Note: This review was published in the October, 2010 edition of "LAMLight," the phyician newsletter of the Lynchburg Academy of Medicine and completes my review of the The Millennium Trilogy begun in the previous blog post.)
In my last blog post I began
a review of Stieg Larsson’s Millennium Trilogy.
As you may recall, these books have sold over 27 million copies in forty
countries over the past five years. The
author, Stieg Larsson, was a Swedish political activist and journalist who died
at age 50 from coronary disease shortly after turning the books into his
publisher. Again, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was reviewed in my last blog post and I will
conclude in this post with a review of the final two books of the trilogy, The Girl who Played with Fire and The Girl who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest.
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo introduces
the two main characters who dominate all three books. They are Lisbeth Salander, a mysterious and
socially awkward young woman in her twenties and Mikael Blomqvist, a
discredited journalist. In Dragon Tattoo the two team up to
investigate a decades old missing person case which eventually discloses a
serial killer and sexual predator.
Lisbeth uses her skills as a computer hacker to help with the
investigation. As Dragon Tattoo concludes, Lisbeth also provides the information
which vindicates Blomqvist. Her new
information (obtained by illegal computer investigation) overturns Mikael’s
previous libel conviction and puts him back in good standing with the
journalism community. Using her
abilities as a computer genius, Lisbeth
also steals all of the industrialist’s money (billions of dollars). Lisbeth proceeds to leave the country in a
jealous rage when she sees Mikael back with his part-time lover and editor of
the magazine he works for.
Played with Fire opens
with Michael hard at work as a publisher of “Millennium” magazine. He is working with two free-lance reporters
on a story to expose sex trafficking in Sweden. The research that these two free lancers have
produced implicates some police as well as high placed Swedish politicians and security
officers. One mysterious character keeps
turning up in the investigation, identified only by the letter “Z”. Meanwhile, Lisbeth has returned to Sweden, mainly
because of boredom, but also to reconnect with her lesbian lover Miriam
Wu. As the article on sex trafficking is
near completion, the two free lance writers are found shot in their apartment
by none other than Mikael Blomqvist. On
the same evening that the two writers are murdered, Lisbeth’s previous legal
custodian is murdered as well.
Circumstantial evidence links Lisbeth to the crimes and a nationwide search is begun. The only person in Sweden who is
convinced of Lisbeth’s innocence is Mikael Blomqvist. The book then follows a chase to find Lisbeth
– by the police who are convinced she is a mad serial killer, by Mikael
Blomqvist who loyally wants to prove that she is not guilty of these crimes and, finally, by members of the Swedish security
community who have much more sinister motives.
The reader eventually discovers that the mysterious “Z” character is
actually a Russian spy named Zalachenko who defected to the Swedes during the Cold War. He was “handled” and protected
by a small cadre of special security agents within the Swedish secret police. Zalachenko also turns out to be Lisbeth
Salander’s father. He has a record of
physical violence, including beating Lisbeth’s mother into a coma. He also is the mastermind behind the ring of
criminals responsible for the trafficking of young Eastern European girls for
the purpose of prostitution. The plot of
this second book is nothing if not tortuous.
Following the trails of Lisbeth Salander as she eludes the police,
Zalachenko’s various compatriots as they try to cover up his crimes and the
actual police who are clueless as to the complexity of the situation, is
difficult. The many Swedish names are similar
and therefore difficult to remember. The
fact that two main characters are named Nieminen (a biker dude who tries to
destroy evidence and find Salander under the direction of Zalachenko) and
Niedermann (Zalachenko’s son and Salander’s half-brother who operates as a
bodyguard and hit-man) makes the whole thing difficult to decipher. The conclusion of Played with Fire is really just a “page break” and resolves few of
the issues raised in the plot: The
relationship between Salander and Zalachenko is well-defined, but their fates are
literally hanging. Both of these
characters are critically injured in a final confrontation on an isolated farm.
This is the
way that Kicked the Hornet’s Nest begins: Salander is in the operating room for a gun
shot wound to her head. Zalachenko has a
severe ax wound to his face and other less critical injuries. Niedermann is on the loose, having killed a
policeman during his escape from the final confrontation in Played with Fire. During most of Hornet’s Nest Salander is in
the hospital recovering from her injury.
Zalachenko is assassinated in his hospital bed (by whom is a critical
plot line). It has become clear by now
that Lisbeth was not responsible for the murders in the Played with Fire, but she is being charged with the attempted
murder of her father. Blomqvist is even
more determined to prove Lisbeth’s innocence and find out who has been
protecting Zalachenko all of these years and why. Blomqvist also discovers the identities of
the security agents who controlled Zalachenko over the decades and
unravels all of their misdeeds. These
injustices included falsifying psychiatric evaluations of the teenaged
Salander, thus committing her to years in a mental institution to keep her from
exposing her infamous father (Zalachenko).
Blomqvist (with the aid of a recovering Salander and her computer
skills) finally figures out the whole mess, writes a huge expose and Salander
is finally vindicated. During all this,
Blomqvist also falls in love with one of the female police investigators, but
does manage to reconcile with Salander by the end of the Trilogy.
Upon completing
The Millennium Trilogy I am reminded
of a quote attributed to Sir Winston
Churchill. When asked about a colleague
Churchill is reported to have said: "He
has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire." These novels have many “virtues”. They have fast-pace action sequences with
explicitly detailed violence and sex (often together). The three volume plot is very sinister and
complex; by the mid-point
of Played with Fire the plot is complex to the
point of being almost impossible to follow.
There is an almost obligatory court scene at the conclusion of Hornet’s Nest which, while wrapping up
some plot-line “loose ends”, seems anti-climactic. The “vices” which I relish in a good novel
include these: First and foremost, I
prefer likable characters. The author,
while developing his characters well and giving us plenty of back-story to really
get to know them, never makes any of his characters very sympathetic. When a story concerns a tragic victim,
especially one of such epic proportions as Lisbeth Salander, I want to like the
character. It’s hard to really like
Lisbeth Salander. The reader can’t help
but feel sorry for her, but like her? I
think not. Mikael Blomqvist, who
represents the hero of these stories, is ethically sound as an investigative
journalist but has the sexual mores of an alley cat. Blomqvist’s own sister, an attorney who
represents Salander, even describes her brother as someone who “screws his way
through life without regard to the consequences”. This represents a contradiction which was
hard for me to resolve. The cabal of
government security people, psychiatrists and lawyers who conspire to imprison
Lisbeth and protect her despicable father are not flawed characters with
mis-guided good intentions. They are
egotistical, delusional and (for the most part) sex driven maniacs. What’s to like or relate to in these
characters? Not much. I also enjoy and appreciate thorough
description of place and setting, which the author did a great job of in the
first book but abandons in the last two.
In summary,
The Millennium Trilogy, including The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, The Girl
Who Played With Fire, and The Girl
Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest, is an international publishing
phenomenon. These books are well
written, fast paced and intriguing. The
subject matter contains details which are not for the faint of heart. The
characters are multi-dimensional and (at least Lisbeth Salander) unusual but
not particularly likable. The story is
complex, but, in the end, complete.
Apparently there is a nearly finished fourth book that has been found in
Mr. Larsson’s laptop. Who knows where
this will lead?
(Blogger Note: This review was originally published in September, 2010 in "The LAMLight", the physician newsletter of the Lynchburg Academy of Medicine. It is posted here in anticipation of the new American movie based on this book to be released December, 2011.)
Stieg
Larsson’s Millennium Trilogy has become an international publishing phenomenon
over the past five years.The author’s
tragic story adds a dimension to these novels which has played a part in
generating enormous public interest.Stieg
Larsson was a political activist and the editor of a Swedish Trotskyist
journal. He exposed racist and extremist
groups in his role as editor and journalist.He was also an avid science fiction fan.He was an admirer of such authors as Val McDermid, Sara Paretsky and
Carol O’Connell and first entertained the idea of writing his own crime novels
in the late 1990s.He proceeded to write
outlines for ten books.He had the first
two written and the third nearly complete before seeking a publisher.After initial rejections he received a
publishing contract in Sweden
for three books.In 2004, shortly after
finishing the third novel in what has become known as The Millennium Trilogy,
and before the first book was published, Larsson died of a heart attack at age
50.The
Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was published posthumously in 2005 and by 2008
he was the second most read international author (behind only Khalid
Hosseini).By 2010, after publication of
The Girl who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest, his
novels have sold over 27 million copies in forty countries.Stieg Larsson is also the first author to
sell one million e-books on Amazon.com.In the September 5, 2010 edition of the “Lynchburg News and Advance”
Larsson owned the top spot on the hard-back fiction list with Hornet’s Nest and the top two spots on
the paperback fiction list with the first two installments.His novels have won too many awards to list
and continue to fascinate an international audience.So, what’s all the fuss about?
The trilogy
really is one moderately long story (contained in Dragon Tattoo) and a second really long story divided between Played with Fire and Hornet’s Nest. I decided to review them that way as well
and so in this blog post I’ll discuss the first book and in the next post I’ll conclude
with the last two.
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo introduces
the two main characters who dominate all three books. The first is Lisbeth Salander, a mysterious
and socially awkward young woman in her twenties. She intermittently plays bass in an all girl
alternative rock band and works for a security company doing free-lance work. Her main skill in this arena is her ability
to hack into any computer or server with record speed. She has very little affect, reacts
inappropriately to social cues and, generally, is a misfit. Although the diagnosis of Asperger’s syndrome
is never used in any of the books, it is apparent that she probably has a
variant of that disorder. Interestingly,
the author created the character after a conversation with some of his
colleagues regarding what characters in children’s literature would be like as
grown-ups. Lisbeth, apparently, is based
on a grown-up Pippi Longstocking as imagined by Stieg Larsson.
It is in her capacity as a computer
hacker that Salander meets Mikael Blomqvist.
Blomqvist is a journalist and co-editor of a monthly political journal (named
“Millennium”) who is investigating a Swedish industrialist. An article regarding this industrialist’s
misappropriation of funds and involvement in international illegal arms
trafficking is eventually published by “Millennium”. Blomqvist is sued for libel and loses his
court case, owing the industrialist reparations and sentenced to three months
in jail. While awaiting incarceration,
Blomqvist is hired by Henrik Vanger, the patriarch of one of Sweden’s
wealthiest families. Henrik wants the journalist
to investigate the disappearance of his favorite niece Harriett. Harriett Vanger disappeared during a family
meeting forty years earlier and was presumed murdered, although her body was
never found. Blomqvist takes residence
on the isolated Vanger estate and enlists Lisbeth Salander’s aid in researching
the family. Quickly the two discover closets
full of Vanger family secrets, including Nazi collaborators, religious zealots
and general family dysfunction. What
follows is a very complicated investigation with unexpected twists and
turns. Various family members come under
suspicion regarding Harriett’s disappearance.
Sinister attempts are made to thwart Blomqvist and Salander’s
investigation. The conclusion of this
book reveals a serial killer who abducted and sexually molested immigrant girls
over the course of many decades. The
complicity of members of the Vanger family and the reasons (and the culprit) for
Harriett’s disappearance are revealed.
Some of the gory details of the killer’s actions were a little graphic
for my taste.
During the investigation Mikael and
Lisbeth become lovers and we learn a lot about both characters. These details play key roles in the plot
lines of the second two novels. We learn
that Lisbeth was confined to a mental institution between the ages of twelve
and fifteen and still must report to a case worker because she is considered
mentally incompetent by the state.
Lisbeth is also revealed as bisexual and completely unpredictable. Mikael has a complicated love life himself,
carrying on a long-term affair with his married co-publisher while having other
lovers (including Lisbeth) at the same time.
This novel is more than just the
introduction of the two main characters.
The plot is fast-moving missing person tale, is surprising and holds the
reader’s interest. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is the only novel of the three
which has a plot which “stands alone” and can be read without reading the other
two. The supporting characters are well
developed also and are all interesting.
The descriptions of Swedish cityscapes and the more rural settings of
the Vander estate are rich and reminiscent of the work of another Scandinavian
author, Norwegian Per Petterson (Out
Stealing Horses).
There are some troublesome aspects
to this book, in my opinion. I have
talked to several people who have read The
Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and steadfastly refuse to even consider reading
the follow-ups. First is the amount of
graphic violent and sexual detail which I mentioned earlier. I think that the most difficult feature,
however, is the general disregard for the female characters in the book. Ironically, Larsson’s original title for
this manuscript was Men Who Hate Women. Just as you wouldn’t judge English culture only
on the writings of Ian Fleming, or American culture on the writings of say, Tom
Clancy, then I don’t think you can judge Swedish culture based only on the
writings of Stieg Larsson. However, in
this novel anyway, women seem to be held in low regard, viewed mainly as sexual
objects and somewhat interchangeable and disposable. The most extreme example of this is the
serial killer who is identified at the conclusion, but some of the other
characters (including Mikael Blomqvist) are guilty of the same tendencies.
The
Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is an intriguing read with a plot that holds
interest and unique characters. The
setting in Sweden
is a plus and the writing is excellent. Twenty
seven million readers tend to agree. If
you are only going to read one of the trilogy, this is the one, but be prepared
for a wild ride.
There is an excellent Swedish movie
with the same title based on this book.
The movie follows the plot of the book fairly accurately, although they
simplify Michael Blomqvist’s love life and confine his list of paramours to
Lisbeth Salander. This makes Blomqvist a
bit more of a sympathetic character than in the book. The movie also alludes to Lisbeth’s early
mental illness issues, but the reasons for this are not well laid out and I
think would be difficult to understand without having read the book. Cinematically, the movie is stunning. The movie brings the images from the novel of
modern Stockholm
as well as the rural countryside vividly to life. The Vanger estate, in the movie, is
particularly beautiful, filmed during the winter and spring seasons. This story has also been optioned by one of
the Hollywood studios. It will be interesting to see if the American
movie is nearly as good as the Swedish one.
(Next post I’ll conclude with a review of The Girl Who Played with Fire and The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest.)
This two hour and forty minute
movie covers the entire career of J. Edgar Hoover, the first Director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Leonardo DiCaprio does an excellent job portraying this complex
man. The story begins with J. Edgar
working for the Attorney General Mitchell Palmer (which pre-dated the
existence of the F.B.I.) When extremists
detonate numerous bombs, including one at the home of Attorney General Palmer,
Hoover was involved in the investigation.
The next Attorney General, Harlan Stone, tasked Hoover with running a
new Bureau of Investigation. He was given
total control and wide ranging powers.
The movie follows his career as the new F.B.I. tries to control “enemies
within”: first gangsters, then Communists and mobsters. Hoover was relentless in his pursuit of
anyone or any group he perceived as working against his country. He kept private files which he often used to
blackmail celebrities and politicians (most notably John F. Kennedy). There is an extended segment about midway
through the movie dealing with the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby in
1932. Using forensic techniques new to
the time, Hoover and the F.B.I. eventually arrested a German immigrant named
Bruno Richard Hauptman. Hauptman was
tried, convicted and executed for the crime, although doubts still exist as to
his guilt.
The movie also tries to sort out
Hoover’s private life. He was deeply
emotionally dependent on his mother, was awkward at best around women and found
his only satisfying relationship with his second in command, Clyde Tolson. They worked closely and also dined and
vacationed together frequently. The
movie briefly mentions a relationship between Hoover and actress Dorothy
Lamour, but focuses mainly on the presumed homosexual relationship with Tolson.
This movie is fairly slow moving,
especially given the subject matter. The
movie is ambitious but tries to do too much.
A life and a career as complex as these just isn’t easily
summarized. The movie lacks focus, at
once trying to illustrate Hoover’s relentless pursuit of any perceived
“subversive” and his abuse of powers while also trying to show the audience
enough psychological background to explain his tortured personal life. It also helps to have some knowledge of the
politics of the times. In the movie
confrontations in Bobby Kennedy’s office (who, as Attorney General was Hoover’s
boss) are portrayed which don’t make much sense without knowledge of Hoover’s
hatred of and ongoing battles with the Kennedys. It is
very well acted, especially by Leonardo DiCaprio as Hoover, Judi Dench as his
mother Annie and Naomi Watts as his longtime personal assistant Helen
Gandy. I enjoyed the movie despite its
flaws.
(Blogger note: This article was previously published in LamLight, physician newsletter of the Lynchburg Academy of Medicine)
Into the Wild
By Jon Krakauer
“Into the Wild” – the
Movie
Screenplay and Directed
by Sean Penn
“Climbing the Sphinx”
By Fred Bahnson
From “Fugue” Magazine
and The Best American Spiritual Writing
2007, Philip Zaleski, Editor
“Solitude” by Lord Byron
To sit on rocks, to muse o'er flood and
fell,
To slowly trace the forest's shady scene,
Where things that own not man's dominion dwell,
And mortal foot hath ne'er or rarely been;
To climb the trackless mountain all unseen,
With the wild flock that never needs a fold;
Alone o'er steeps and foaming falls to lean;
This is not solitude, 'tis but to hold
Converse with Nature's charms, and view her stores unrolled.
But midst the crowd, the hurry, the shock of men,
To hear, to see, to feel and to possess,
And roam alone, the world's tired denizen,
With none who bless us, none whom we can bless;
Minions of splendour shrinking from distress!
None that, with kindred consciousness endued,
If we were not, would seem to smile the less
Of all the flattered, followed, sought and sued;
This is to be alone; this, this is solitude!
Into the Wildis the story of Chris McAndless, an
Emory University honors graduate who gave away the remainder of his college
fund, packed his belongings into an ancient Datsun B-210 and departed on a
“magnificent adventure,” purposefully neglecting to tell anyone where he was
headed or why. Jon Krakauer is a
well-respected adventure writer. The book,
as well as the movie, are outgrowths of an article he wrote in 1991 for “Outdoor”
magazine after Chris’ body was found in an abandoned bus in the wilds of Alaska. The author has done a masterful job of
tracking Chris’ two year odyssey through Arizona, California, Mexico, Nevada,
Montana, North Dakota and, finally and fatally, Alaska. He has interviewed many people whom Chris
befriended on the road: employers, co-workers and fellow vagabonds. Through these interviews and observations,
the picture of a complex personality evolves.
Chris McAndless appears to be a
walking contradiction. He wanted to live
off of the land and survive on his own instincts (in the manner of his hero
Henry David Thoreau) but dove into all of his quests completely
unprepared. Krakauer points out that his
death was totally preventable if he had just taken a topographical map with
him. He had a strained relationship with
his parents for reasons that are well enumerated in the book, but had a
wonderful, caring and loving relationship with his younger sister. Once he departed Atlanta he did not communicate with any of
his family, even his sister who he had communicated with dutifully over the
years. He seems somewhat slovenly and
unkempt but is described by employers (a MacDonald’s manager and the owner of a
grain elevator in North Dakota)
as diligent and extremely hard-working.
He proclaimed this personal philosophy of simplicity and humility, yet
renamed himself “Alexander Supertramp.”
He introduced himself by that name on the road and left graffiti here
and there over that signature.
The author spends a good deal of
the narrative trying to justify Chris McAndless’ wanderlust and convince the
reader that the youngster was not just completely off his rocker. Read from a parents’ point of view, this book
is a horror story. The family did make
an attempt to locate Chris through the use of a private investigator, but he had
hidden his tracks too well. Into the Wild also contains some of the
author’s own experiences with mountain climbing and wilderness
exploration. He also includes stories of
other ill-fated expeditions.
In summary, Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer is an entertaining but disturbing
read. The reader never really gets a
grip on the motivations of Chris McAndless, but certainly comes away from this
with a true sense of tragedy.
“Into the Wild” (The
Movie)
Screenplay and
Directed by Sean Penn
This movie made it to Lynchburg over two months after its release and therefore my wife and I made a road trip to the Vinegar Hill Theater in Charlottesville to see it sooner. It was well worth the trip. Vinegar Hill Theater is a small arts cinema
on one end of the downtown pedestrian Mall.
The movie is really quite stunning.
The cinematography is magnificent.
The outdoor scenes, especially in Alaska,
are breathtaking. The film makers use
odd camera angles and unusual lighting to great effect. The soaring bald eagles, roaming moose and
antelope and even bear make you feel like you are watching a “National
Geographic” or Discovery Channel special.
I was curious as to how anyone could make a movie out of a book with
such little dialogue, but Sean Penn has made good use of some of the written
messages from Chris McAndless printed over some scenes to make the story move
along. The atmosphere and “feel” of the
movie is aided dramatically by a surreal soundtrack written and recorded by
former Pearl Jam vocalist/guitarist Eddie Vedder. The sound track album is exceptional by
itself, but even more so after having seen “Into the Wild”.
The movie succeeds in several areas
where the book falters. First, Sean Penn
makes Chris McAndless a very likable character.
The book spends most of the time
trying to convince the reader that Chris just isn’t crazy. The movie fleshes out the character and this
version of Chris McAndless is really a terrific young man. He comes
across as the ultimate idealist and hater of hypocrisy. The minor characters emerge as very
sympathetic characters as well. In the
book, these characters are treated in a very journalistic or reportorial way,
whereas in the movie they come to life. It seems that peace and harmony follow Chris
everywhere he goes. Peace and harmony
follows for everyone, that is, except for Chris McAndless. In
one memorable scene at Big Sur in California,
Rainey, one half of a hippie couple who Chris helps resolve relationship
problems, asks Chris: “Are you Jesus?”
He helps an old man (Mr. Frantz, played marvelously by octogenarian Hal
Holbrook) come to grips with his loneliness and despair over being the last one
of his family still living. Mr. Frantz
is so taken with Chris that he tries to adopt him. Chris even helps a vagabond teenager deal
with parental control issues. This
idealistic movie version of Chris helps everyone cope with their own demons
even as he searches for the understanding of his own. The tragic death scene at
the end of the movie is as haunting an experience as I’ve ever experienced in a
movie. I think it will stay with me
forever.
“Climbing the Sphinx”
By Fred Bahnson
In contrast to the Chris McAndless
story is the story “Climbing the Sphinx” by Fred Bahnson. This was originally published in “Fugue” magazine
and reprinted in The Best American
Spiritual Writing of 2007 edited by Philip Zaleski. This is an account of the author and his best
friend’s climb of The Sphinx, a mountain adjacent to the EnnisValley in southwestern Montana. There is no doubt about Fred Bahnson’s
motivation for mountain climbing. He
describes the area of EnnisPass in the opening
paragraph thus: “All that remains (after tourist season) is a comforting
emptiness that broods over the bent world of mountain and valley like the Holy
Ghost.” These two decide to become the
first to climb the icy slope without a rope.
This is a riveting description of a harrowing and near fatal trip. The author describes one portion of the
climb: “The passage upward was a passage through
, a vertical portal into Meaning.”
Further along: “Flow dissolves self-awareness. Gone are my flatland pedestrian worries about
jobs and girlfriends – or lack thereof.
Gone my doubts and fears, even my joys and elations. Those feelings will return, all of them
magnified, but in flow I just am. Both
climbers survive despite a broken ice ax and a sudden snow squall and
return. The author then asks the
ultimate question: “This climbing business, this search for flow, for spiritual
meaning – isn’t it just glorified selfishness?”
The author recounts a friend who died mountain climbing in Peru, leaving
behind his new bride to grieve as a young widow. “Where was Rob’s wife now? How had she benefited from the risks he
took?” These are the questions that Jon
Krakauer never answers in his examination of Chris McAndless in Into the Wild. Sean Penn never really answers these
questions either, although he does portray the anguish of Chris’ parents and
sister quite dramatically. Fred
Bahnson eventually stops his high adventures while his companion on the Sphinx
has an “Alexander Supertramp” type experience suffering a fatal fall while
downhill skiing Mont Blanc in France. Mr. Bahnson admits that even though “from the mountains comes a welling up of
deep-down things, a profound sense of life’s inherent majesty” that “the Sphinx
and her pyramids had become idols. Their
loosening grip on me was being supplanted by the unshakable grip of God. Augustine said that our hearts are restless
until they find rest in God, but my Great Wanting was not so much a wanting to
find as a wanting to be found.”
Nowhere in the book Into the Wild is there a hint of a
spiritual awakening. The Chris McAndless
story portrayed by Jon Krakauer seems like an aimless wandering, a wasted
life. Sean Penn does give more meaning
to the “magnificent adventure” of Chris McAndless, scripting the last eighteen
months of Chris’ life as an attempt to deal with the hypocrisy and lies of his
father. In the movie, just as Chris
comes to an epiphany of sorts, he is betrayed by his lack of preparation and
the cruelty and severity of the wild. Therein
resides the real tragedy of Chris McAndless.
From “Guaranteed” by Eddie Vedder (Soundtrack to “Into the
Wild”)
On bended knee is no way to be free
Lifting up an empty cup I ask silently
That all my destinations will accept the one that’s me
So I can breathe
Leave it to me as I find a way to be
Consider me a satellite forever orbiting
I knew all the rules but the rules did not know me
