Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Rooney Mara’

Back in 2009 in the infancy of this sit, I started compiling a top ten most promising actors and actresses.  While I was still deciding on who would make the grade, Caz from Lets Go to the Movies posted a list of top ten actors.  I duly decided to drop my actors list and write about ten young actresses.  I didn’t have a hard and fast criteria, but set an age limit of 25 and excluded anyone who was an established A list star, such as Scarlett Johansson and Keira Knightley who were both 24 at the time.  So what has happened since then?  The most significant thing, Scarlett Johansson aside, most of the biggest stars have broken through since the my 2009 article they include: Jennifer Lawrence, Shailene Woodley , Carey Mulligan, Rooney Mara, Dakota Johnson, Elizabeth Olsen, Mia Wasikowska and Emma Stone.  The most significant people I failed to mention were: Saoirse Ronan and Anna Kendrick.  So what of those I mentioned?

The Hunger Games

Dakota Fanning: 15 at the time now 23, Dakota’s most significant performance that I have seen since my original post was as Cherie Currie in The Runaways.  Although still giving good performances the great roles don’t appear to be coming her way.  She seems to have been somewhat eclipsed by her Younger sister Elle (19 today). She does have the interesting looking Ocean’s Eight coming out next year.Dakota Fanning

Kristen Stewart: I sighted Adventurland as proof that Stewart (who turns 27 today), could act and had a career beyond Bella Swan.  I think I have been proved right.   With standout suporting roles in Still Alice, Clouds of Sils Maria and Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk and excellent starring roles in Personal Shopper and Equals she has not only proved to be a great actress, but also one who makes interesting choices.  I am yet to see Certain Women but have heard positive things about it. Kristen Stewart

Nikki Reed: 13 is remains and will probably remain the actresses most significant work.  Now 28 she has totally dropped off my radar, I don’t think I have seen her in anything since the Twighlight movies.   Nikki Reed

Ellen Page: After my original article Page now 30 went on to star in the hugely successful Inception directed by Christopher Nolan.  She reprised her role as Kitty Pryde in the X-Men franchise playing a relatively small but very significant part in the excellent Days of Future Past. Kitty Pryde Ellen Page

Evan Rachel Wood: I first say  Wood now 29 starring alongside Nikki Reed in 13.  At the time of writing she had appeared in The Wrestler alongside Mickey Rourke and Marisa Tomei, she appeared to be on the brink of mega stardom but never really made the jump.  She has since found her most significant part and greatest acclaim on TV in Westworld.Evan Rachel Wood

Camilla Belle: At the time of writing back in 09, Belle’s star was on the rise.  Now 30, I haven’t seen her in a single movie.  She is still working with 10 IMDB credits it the time, I just haven’t seen any of them. Camilla Belle

Olivia Thirlby:  Best known as Juno’s best friend Olivia Thirlby was a bit of a long shot for the list.  Now 30, she hasn’t found the breakthrough role she needed.  however, she has starred in one excellent film, the massively underappreciated Dredd. Olivia Thirlby

Kat Dennings: Dennings now 30 is currently best known for the TV show 2 Broke Girls and for providing comic relief in the Thor movies . Kat Dennings

Megan Fox:  Now 30, I expected Fox to try more interesting roles following Jennifer’s Body, unfortunately the Transformers star seems to be concentrated on rubbish comedies and the rebooted Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle franchise. TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES

Amanda Seyfried: At 24 then and 31 now, Seyfried is the oldest star on the list.  She has proved to be a first rate and diverse actor.  Most exciting of all, she is set to appear in the new series of Twin Peaks later this year. Amanda Seyfried

I also had a couple of bonus picks:

Olivia Wilde: At 25, now 33 Wilde was older than the rest on the list and still largely a TV star.  She made the breakthrough with several movie roles, the highest profile being TRON: Legacy.  She continues to work in both TV and film. olivia wilde tron

Jennifer Ulrich: I predicted the German actress now 32 would make the jump to Hollywood, she hasn’t.  She has continued to work in German TV and Movies. Jennifer Ulrichwe are the night

Read Full Post »

When I compiled a list of my top ten vampire movies in 2009 the 2008 Swedish movie Let The Right One In came second behind Near Dark (1987). Shortly after this the movie was remade in America as Let Me In (2010). The remake was well directed by Matt Reeves who had previously impressed with Cloverfield (2008). The acting was great particularly from Kodi Smit-McPhee and Chloë Moretz. Greig Fraser’s photography is stunning and the New Mexico locations are surprisingly good. Despite all this I didn’t actually enjoy the movie coming so close after the original Swedish film it all fell a little flat, it certainly offered nothing new but also inexplicably felt to be lacking something; in short what was the point? This was my greatest fear for The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, coming just two years after the Swedish version (actually called Män som hatar kvinnor that translates to Men who hate women. Like the book it is based on it was renamed The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo for the English speaking market) how relevant would it be?

The first thing to say now that I have seen both versions (and having previously read the book) is that the David Fincher version is an adaptation of the book and not a remake of the original film. The reason they are so similar is that they are both relatively faithful to the book. Normally this would be a good thing, but to be relevant so soon after the first adaptation I can’t help thinking it needs to separate itself from the original in the way Let Me In failed to do. The interesting thing is that they have both watered-down the politics that are personal to the author and cement the story as a Swedish one. This is one of the changes that makes the Swedish setting less important and would have made transposing the story to the UK or the USA possible. As well as a more original film it could have had a very timely subtext about the financial crisis. A few changes would have been needed but it is an adaptation of a book into a different medium and changes will always be made.

Taken on their own merits, both films are very good. They both fall down in a few places, sometimes the same places possibly showing limitations of the source novel. The key to how you will feel about the films rests in the portrayals of Salander and Blomkvist and therefore is likely to decide if you like the films and which you prefer. After seeing the original film I felt it was perfectly cast: Michael Nyqvist plays as Blomkvist as an everyman hero. Lisbeth Salander, is a harder part to fill but Noomi Rapace was a revelation. The perfect portrayal (despite being a little too old and too tall for the part) rightly launched her onto the international stage. In the new version Daniel Craig is pretty good fit as Blomkvist un-toning his James Bond physique. Rooney Mara’s Lisbeth Salander is more likely to divide opinion; as I see it, from an acting point of view she isn’t as good as Rapace, however conversely her performance is better. She plays Lisbeth as both more vulnerable and more dangerous, this is both more interesting and closer to the character in the book.

So where do we find relevance in this remake, at what point does it become a credible film in its own right and stop being a pointless imitation for people who can’t be bothered to read subtitles? I have a theory on this. As mentioned at the top I do believe it is an adaptation of the book and not a remake of the first film, but this isn’t enough. The greatest failing of the original Swedish version was not in the film itself but its two sequels: The Girl Who Played with Fire (Flickan som lekte med elden) and The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets’ Nest (Luftslottet som sprängdes). Both far weaker films mainly because they fail to move away from their TV origins. And that is where David Fincher and his cast can find relevance and a reason for the existence of a $100million that differs little from the original (other than to make money for its studio), they have the opportunity to put what went wrong first time around and give us parts two and three of the Millennium trilogy that live up to The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.

Read Full Post »