The Snowman
Dir: Tomas Alfredson
2017
***
Back in the late 00s you’d be hard-pressed to see someone on the commute to work not reading a Jo Nesbo novel. I have a couple of friends who became obsessed with his books and they were both determined to recruit me into the cult, but pestering doesn’t really work with me, in fact it has the opposite effect, and I’m quite happy with my own obsessions without feeling the need to interfere in others’. I sense I may have lost out but I can live with it. I’ve never read a Jo Nesbo book and nor have I watched one of the many popular Scandinavian thrillers I hear so much about. I am however, familiar with the work of director Tomas Alfredson and after reading a general synopsis of The Snowman I became excited. Now I understand why a novel is changed for the big screen adaptation, on the rare occasion the story is improved and from what I’ve learned about Nesbo’s 2007 novel, I think this may just be the case here in many respects. However, I have never seen a film with quite so many pointless sub-plots and unanswered questions. A good thriller will have a couple of choice red herrings but Alfredson’s Snowman has an ocean full of them. Alfredson is very capable when it comes to thrillers as he has great timing and commands beautifully rich visuals that lend themselves well to the genre. His directional style has become rather influential, so it is shocking to see how misused it is here. Don’t get me wrong, there are some stunning scenes within the movie, it’s just that they often come at the expense of logic, narrative and a decent script. The film is so disjointed you have to wonder who was calling the shots. Alfredson has been honest from the beginning, stating that 15% of the screenplay wasn’t filmed during principal photography, leading to huge issues when it came to the film’s narrative. “Our shoot time in Norway was way too short, we didn't get the whole story with us and when we started cutting we discovered that a lot was missing. It's like when you're making a big jigsaw puzzle and a few pieces are missing so you don't see the whole picture.” Alfredson was hired to direct after Martin Scorsese abruptly switched from being director to executive producer saying that “…It happened abruptly. Suddenly we got notice that we had the money and could start the shoot in London. Our shoot time in Norway was way too short, we didn’t get the whole story with us and when we started cutting we discovered that a lot was missing.” I admire Alfredson’s honesty, although it might cost him a bit of work in the future. What he says makes a lot of sense, so the big question is why was it rushed? The initial plan was for The Snowman to follow Nesbo’s Harry Hole series, starting with the seventh book (naturally). It hasn’t quite worked out for Alex Cross or Jack Reacher just yet, but if I was a betting man I would have wagered that Harry had a pretty good shot at being a serious contender. However, as much as I like him, I don’t think Michael Fassbender was right for the part. There was very little too the supposedly great detective, the character is already a bit of a cliché with a horrible name but Fassbender added nothing to him. It's also odd how English Oslo is portrayed, with no Norwegian uttered or written anywhere, like it is an Oslo themed place rather than Oslo itself. Charlotte Gainsbourg was given very little to work with, Toby Jones deserved a bigger part, J.K. Simmons character didn’t seem to have much point and Val Kilmer was something of a distraction. He doesn’t look very well and I was concentrating more on the fact that he was dubbed then what he was actually doing on screen. It is only Rebecca Ferguson who manages to give depth to her character which was completely re-written from the original. I’m not sure why Chloe Sevigny’s character was given a twin either? I’m sure it made sense in the book but in the film it’s puzzling, verging on stupid. I think one of the biggest issues, apart from the narrative being all over the place and none of it making any sense, is the Snowman itself. A snowman will appear at the site of most of the murders, giving the film its title and significant focal point. However, there is very little point to it. There are a couple of terrifying scenes involving snowmen that are the film’s highlights but it is never made clear why our murderer has a thing for them. Our murdered also has a specific way of killing and presenting the bodies, again, none of this is explained. The film looks good but has no substance. There are flashes of gore and horror but no real feeling of tension, anticipation, terror or excitement. I also guessed who the snowman was halfway through the film. What connects the victims makes little sense and is never convincing, although the event that triggers the Snowman’s vengeance works as a brilliant intro to the film. It’s a two hour film with only about 15 minutes worth of really good bits in it. It’s very watchable however, and when it becomes clear that it’s never going to make sense it becomes almost more enjoyable. It felt like a one-off made for TV drama, a good one at that, it is just a terrible shame and a waste of good actors/director/money/idea that should have been something amazing. Tomas Alfredson did the best with what he was given and should be congratulated with what he managed given the circumstances. I would like to have seen his version given more time and money. I’d like to see Martin Scorsese’s version also and am interested to know why he backed out so suddenly. It’s great idea and in a fantasy world I would have loved to have seen Stanley Kubrick direct it, but this isn’t fantasy, it is reality, and I’m afraid the reality is that The Snowman is a complete mess. I'm being generous and I’m giving it three stars however because the few thrilling scenes really are superb, as is much of the general imagery, and I will never look at a snowman (or Chloe Sevigny) the same way again.