Review of ‘The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo’: must see or must miss?

*Note: The first part of this review is (relatively) spoiler-free, but I’ll include some spoilers at the end.

First off, I should admit at the beginning that I’m a fan of the Millennium trilogy, the three books that Stieg Larsson wrote before his death in 2004. The books have their faults, of course, but the heart of the series was a completely unique, fascinating, well-drawn, and unconventional heroine. I’ve seen the Swedish films as well, the ones starring Noomi Rapace and Michael Nyqvist, and they’re decent-to-good adaptations of Larsson’s work. My favorite book and my favorite Swedish film apaptation is still the first one, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. I know the Swedish films are often criticized, but I think the Swedish GWTDT film is excellent, and it stands up.

So, given my love of the Swedish film, I was already primed to be extra-judgy of David Fincher’s Americanized adaptation. Plus, I’ve grown to dislike Rooney Mara a little bit, considering her interviews are revealing the little fact that she’s kind of dumb and conceited. But I have to say… there was a lot in Fincher’s film that I really liked.

The basic story is… well, there’s nothing basic. Calling it a “Whodunit” or a murder mystery isn’t the whole plot, but in its essence, yes, it is a murder mystery. Rooney Mara plays Lisbeth Salander, a young woman who is misanthropic, a legal ward of the state, who may or may not have mental issues and violent tendencies. She’s blunt, she’s honest, she’s supposed to look very young and androgynous, and she’s supposed to radiate intelligence. Daniel Craig plays Mikael Blomkvist, one of Sweden’s most respected and controversial journalists, who just got his ass handed to him in a libel case.

So, how did Daniel and Rooney do? Rooney was much better than I was expecting. She had the look of a haunted child, and she often looked frighteningly small and vulnerable. Her accent work was stellar – I never heard anything resembling an American accent. But! I still prefer Noomi Rapace’s Lisbeth, honestly. When Lisbeth is in danger, Noomi let you feel her terror and helplessness, and it was devastating. When Lisbeth is angry, Noomi projected the shaking, all-consuming rage. Rooney just… didn’t. Her performance wasn’t as powerful, but it was still pretty solid.

As for Daniel as Mikael… he was good. The Mikael character is at his best when he’s playing off the women in his life, and Daniel definitely came alive in his scenes with Robin Wright and Rooney. There were moments where Daniel seemed less like a journalist in over his head and more like a supremely competent British spy, though. Daniel just seems too… capable. But he was good, and at the end of the day, he’s lovely to look at, and he brought more emotional depth to Blomkvist than Nyqvist did.

My biggest problem with the film was David Fincher’s direction, and whoever edited it. The pacing was completely off in the first 15 minutes – I knew what was happening in the story, but even I was like, “WTF is happening here? Why are they introducing that character right now?” Then, in the final big action/suspense sequence, the whole thing was just a f–king mess. What could have been a series of gradually terrifying scenes were completely c–kblocked by bad pacing, bad editing and several sequences that should have been cut out of the script in the first week of preproduction. And then after that, the movie just hung around for another half an hour while they wrapped up the additional plotlines. Those plotlines had to be dealt with, of course, but Fincher really took his time and it got slightly boring.

So… I’m recommending the film, but I also think you guys should totally try the Swedish film, just because it really is a much, much better film overall. Seriously.

************SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS ****************

*Fincher messed with the story line in some little ways that I didn’t mind at all. Like, he introduced a cat to the little cottage where Blomkvist is staying, and g–damn if that cat didn’t steal all of Daniel’s scenes. At one point, Blomkvist is asleep in bed, and the cat is sleeping on his head. That was my favorite part. UPDATE: Er, was there a cat in the book? I completely forgot about it. Sorry!

*Some of you are probably wondering about the pivotal rape scene. In the Swedish film, the violence is traumatizing to the viewer, and you can really feel Lisbeth’s helplessness, her terror, her inability to fight back. The scene is so powerful, that act of violence haunts the rest of the film, and the rest of the series. The scene in this film was… well, it’s still violent and disturbing, but it was nowhere near as traumatic as the Swedish version.

*It takes FOREVER for Lisbeth and Mikael to finally get to work together, and even then, the story keeps separating them. It pissed me off – we waited for so long to see lots of scenes with Mikael and Lisbeth in the cottage, and you barely get any payoff.

*Lisbeth’s control over her own destiny was subtly taken away from book to screen. In the books, she makes several pivotal decisions that influence future plotlines. In the American film, those decisions are made by other characters – and things happen TO her, and she does less to affect her own course of action.

Promotional images courtesy of Columbia Pictures/IMDB and Empire Magazine.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

69 Responses to “Review of ‘The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo’: must see or must miss?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Melbeezy says:

    That last pic is kinda hot!

  2. lisa says:

    Going to see it on Christmas Day.. Can’t wait. I love David. I have not see the original films nor read the books. So I like that I go into it blind. I never understand why people think every new interpretation has to be like the original or that it should follow the book to the letter. The Swedish movies to my understanding were not the be all of it all. The majority of the people that see this know nothing about the first film or the books.

    Looking forward to see it.

    • L says:

      I disagree (at least about the books) They were really really really popular here in the States and were on best seller lists for weeks. People might not have seen the other movie, but I actually think most people who are going to see the movie have read the books.

  3. Bite me says:

    I ve read the trilogy and I have seen Swedish version of TGWTGT on Netflix … I plan on watching this one since I love Fincher but not on Christmas DAy

  4. Honey says:

    Everyone, including my grandmother, has read those books. The first one was pretty good, but not the big deal people make it out to be. People just gravitate to Lisbeth as a kickass anti-hero, which I do understand.

    Also I’m pretty sure the stray cat was present in the first book.

    • lucy2 says:

      I have to agree – I thought the books were good, but didn’t get the way people raved about them. Lisbeth is definitely an interesting character, but the actual story itself was good, not great – in my humble opinion.
      Definitely was a cat in the first book.

      I’d like to see the films, but it’s not a real Christmas-y kind of movie for me. I’ll probably wait for DVD.

  5. RocketMerry says:

    You know, this idea that actors must also be quite intelligent and charming is baffling to me.
    They very rarely are smarted than “regular” people and besides, it is quite impossible to give good interviews as often as it’s needed. It would be better to never expect too much off an actor’s brain: that way, when a Meryl Streep or a Cate Blanchet comes along it’s actually surprising.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      Yeah I suppose you’re right but I’m one of those people that always thinks actors should be both intelligent and charming. As far as *intelligence*-I would think they would need to possess at least some level of emotional intelligence (EQ) in order to act in an effective way (n/a for sh*tty actors obviously).
      I think I’ve always assumed *charming* because Hollywood is such a shmooze industry centered around Who You Know and PR etc that I think they need to be charming in order to win over the public AND to get roles. Obviously, this isn’t always the case 🙂 For instance-Rooney, Heigl, Franco etc….

    • Zoe says:

      I always think it’s amusing when people stereotype actors as brainless. It takes a tremendous amount of intelligence to act, anyone who doesn’t believe that is someone that doesn’t understand the craft and the amount of work that goes into a great performance. Not everyone is good at giving interviews, people get nervous or trip up or public speaking isn’t their forte. It’s a completely different skill set than acting. Giving a bad interview doesn’t mean you aren’t intelligent. Bear in mind that there are also multiple intelligences.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        @ Zoe-I think to say it takes a “tremendous amount of intelligence to act” is overstating it a bit. It isn’t neuropsychology. But as someone that does not act, I DO agree with you though that it seems like it would be extremely difficult to do it well. And I DO think that the best actors approach acting as a skill and they DO put a great deal of research and thought into their role.

    • SEF says:

      RocketMerry – I agree with you! Except that, for me, I don’t expect much intelligence from actors. So often they are narcissistic, shallow people who got where they are on charm or looks, rather than education or natural intelligence. Isn’t it funny, though, that some actors can “play” so much smarter than they are? That cracks me up. But good for them, I guess!

    • Samantha says:

      Personally, I don’t care if actors are intelligent and charming. I just prefer that they not be complete d–kheads.

  6. Catherine says:

    There was a cat in the book, too.

    • erin says:

      truth! what happens to the cat made me want to cry a bit while reading the book. i’m a sucker for cats.

    • Delta Juliet says:

      I thought the same thing when I read the comment about the cat. Especially since there is a fairly memorable scene involving him.

    • Original Bee says:

      I liked both the Swedish and American versions. However,I hated the American film’s ending. I was literally rolling my eyes during the last scene. That cat really was a scene stealer! I kept waiting for him to appear again. I adore cats, and the fact that Daniel/Mikael took the him in made me like his character more. I could sense what was coming for the kitty because anytime you have an animal in a mystery/suspense film it does not end well for the animal.

  7. Theuth says:

    It piss me that I have to wait a lot before seeing this movie (…damn you Italian dubbing! DAMN YOU!!), so this review is quite a Christmas present for me, Kaiser.
    I’m one of those people who think that the Swedish movies weren’t great, except Noomi Rapace, so listening your thoughts about this film have in some way confirmed what I think: that the American movie will be more similar to the first book (where Lisbet is a primary character, but not the only one) and overall better BUT without the powerful performance of Rapace – which is an incredible actress, but I’m curious because I always thought she looked older/stronger/too intimidating (physically speaking) than her book counterpart.
    About your spoiler part:
    2) After the first time you see the scene in the movie, you are pretty much tainted. Sooooo…maybe seeing it again is less powerful?
    3-4) As I said, Lisbeth in the book is an important character but not THE MOST important, and works in a different way than the journalist. I didn’t like how much they cut in the Swedish movie about Bloomvist’s character and hinted about Lisbeth’s past, screwing all the timeline of the series – I probably will prefer this version, if it’s more faithful to the book.
    However, I hope Fincher will never work on the other two books. They are far inferior than the first, very boring and totally different from this one.
    Again, DAMN YOU ITALIAN DUBBING!! Why do you have to make me wait till February?????

  8. erin says:

    Considering how dense the storyline of the book is, I think Fincher did a very good job of carving a movie plot out of it. Book adaptations will always frustrate the diehard fans, with what’s left out, what’s altered for time for plot, etc. I felt that way, but I also went into it knowing it wouldn’t completely satisfy me without being a 10 hour long movie! That being said, I enjoyed the movie a lot. Aesthetically it was great, obvious for a Fincher movie, and the score was fantastic.

    Having seen the Swedish films as well, I really think Rooney did a fantastic f-ing job. I don’t think comparing the actresses is worth doing, and the films are incredibly different and not particularly worth comparing as well. The two adaptations of the Salander character are very different–I think the American version captures her ‘look’ way better than the Swedish.

    I think this review comes off as having a bias of someone who read the books, saw the Swedish films, and then decided that those films were how they felt the books ‘were’. I know you state that you were predetermined to brush off the Fincher adaptation. For example, the rape scene in the Swedish version was more physically brutal perhaps, but the American version gave me chills; it was more emotionally brutal. Lisbeth Salander has feelings too, you know.

  9. Tapioca says:

    Both Let The Right One In and Let Me In were great films, so I have no problem with a recent book being made into a recent Swedish-language film being made into an English film. And I love David Fincher generally, but it doesn’t come out in the UK until the 26th, bah humbug!

    Amusingly, according to an extra, Rooney Mara was a bit worried about people comparing her performance to Noomi Rapace: “Mara asked her assistant all the time, ‘Do we not do better when we did this scene? Do I not look better than her? Am I not better? Am I not young? Are not I cool?’ And the assistant just replied, ‘Yes, yes, yes! You’re the best, you’re the best!'”

    I now like to picture George Lazenby doing the same after landing the part of James Bond after Sean Connery!

  10. hstl1 says:

    I am looking forward to seeing it. I am definitely setting aside anything that Rooney Mara and Daniel Craig have said/done in their personal lives.

    Sometimes I can’t get past celebrity gossip and enjoy a film but I am going to try with this one!

  11. Lara says:

    For all the people saying Craig is too serious read this:

    ————-
    I’ve had Enya stuck in my head for the last week. I’m not sure whether to be happy or upset about that.
    Well, let’s say that you had Enya stuck in your head for the right reasons.

    And nothing against “Orinoco Flow”…
    It’s funny, we were sitting in a hotel room — ironically just like this one, because it was a sister hotel in Soho. And we were saying that Martin [Stellan Skarsgard’s character] should be this audiophile. But what song should he play? And Daniel Craig piped up and said, “Orinoco Flow!” And everyone in the room was like, “What is he talking about?” And he says, “No, no, no, and he went and grabbed his iPod [at this point Fincher runs across the room to simulate Craig’s actions] and he went, “play.” And we all just burst into laughter. I didn’t know that’s what it’s called. If he had said “Sail Away”…

    I enjoyed that you acted that out for me. I felt like I was there.
    The funny thing was with his scamper across the room … he was so pleased.

    I would have never guessed that song idea came from him.
    Daniel Craig is a *beep* funny man.
    —————-

    http://blog.moviefone.com/2011/12/19/david-fincher-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-return-of-the-jedi-interview/

  12. Brittney says:

    Introduced a cat? That cat had a pretty prominent place in the book, too. So much so that it became the Chekhov’s gun of the story for me.

    Sad to hear that Fincher erased some of Lisbeth’s autonomy and influence. I’d like not to read into that, but Hollywood has a way of doing that to female characters.

  13. Lisa says:

    David Fincher directed it…

    Whatever David Fincher directs…I go and see…period…

    Even though it USUALLY means that I need a therapy session afterwards…or the minimum…HAPPY PILLS!!!

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      Same here. Never read the books, STRONGLY dislike Rooney but I’ll see it because of Fincher.

  14. ladybert62 says:

    I seldom see movies after reading the book because the movie seldom matches the story in the book.

    Anyway, I tried reading the first book of this trilogy and after 150 pages I was bored to death and gave up. Perhaps the movie (in this instance) is better than the book.

  15. omj says:

    I just don’t see how this film was necessary. There already is a very good adaption, in (GASP!) Swedish (the language of the actual locations in the book).
    I am not so enamored of Daniel Craig (who was the only remotely tolerable part of Cowboys and Aliens, and that’s only because he’s purty, not due to any stellar acting performance) that I’ll subject myself to a spoiled self-centered, pseudo intellectual Mara Rooney, who seems, at best, insufferable.
    Aside from that, do you see the Swedes remaking Star Wars or the Godfather films, simply because they aren’t in Swedish? It’s not that I don’t get that this film will appeal to a wider audience, and but I guess I’m not a part of that audience. Whatevs.

    • Theuth says:

      You’ll be surprised of how many European/American movies are remaked in countries with a big cinematographic industry like China or India…
      While I’m against any kind of pointless remake just for the sake of changing the language/setting (like the abomination of American Old Boy or Hunger Games, which is ripped by a book copying Battle Royal, argh) especially if the original is still relatively new, I don’t (mostly) mind a new “interpretation” of the book (which is what this movie aspire).
      I fell like this movie could actually be ok, if not good. I don’t understeand the avversion of USA against subtitles or dubbing, so if this is a way to make people knowledges about foreign culture, as poor as it is, it’s still a little step.

    • Tiffany says:

      It is silly to suggest that the Swedish films should be the only version made. A good story can be told a million different ways (see Shakespeare, etc.). I think the Swedish films had good acting, but they were shot in such a boring way. Slow pacing, too much light, and without suspence.

  16. the original bellaluna says:

    If it comes on HBO or Netflix, maybe. But I’m not going to a theatre to see a bastardisation of a book I’ve already read.

    ladybert – Yes, I had a friend who was trying to read GWTDT & just could NOT get into it. I kept telling her to persevere, because the pay-off is so great. (I agree though, it was a tedious read at first. Then I couldn’t put it down.)

  17. theaPie says:

    I actually really want to see this. I plan to treat myself to a matinee when it comes to my area. Wee!

  18. Girl says:

    I think I saw that the original is on NetFlix streaming. I hope it’s still there today. Thanks for the review.

  19. Sakyiwaa says:

    I think it annoys me that it was re-made. I m still quite taken by the swedish one.

  20. Amy says:

    I really liked the original Swedish film (just the first one), so I’m going to miss the Fincher version until it gets a DVD release.

  21. Mikki says:

    I too tried to read the book, and my sister-in-law assured me it would get better along the way…but I just couldn’t get into it. Now I’ve read the review on Pajiba, and it was quite spoilerish and the description of the very graphic rape scenes (and her retaliation on her attacker) were enough to convince me that I do not wish to see this. I don’t need to have that burned into my mind…shudder…

    • layla says:

      Im with you on this!

      I found the writing so bland, methodical and dry that I barely made it thru the first chapter before I closed the book. For good.

      I did, however, watch (and enjoy) the Swedish version.

  22. Anna says:

    Loved it, love the books, like the Swedish film. The thing with the first adaption was that there’s so much great (and better) crime films in Sweden and Scandinavia that for me it got lost in the mix.

  23. RobN says:

    I think the criticisms of the movie are interesting because those are actually my criticisms of the book, it does take forever for Lisbeth and Mikael to end up in the same scenes in the book and they do keep them apart a lot, and all of the books have an unnecessary extra 50 pages after the story is already wrapped up. In fact, virtually the entire third book is extra crap that should have been a 40 page epilogue to the second.

  24. Calli P says:

    I won’t watch this because I watched the original subtitled flicks. I feel that RM could not begin to compare to Noomi Rapace. I just don’t want to spoil the experience with a remake.

    • RobN says:

      I just don’t get why so many people are averse to seeing a different take on a popular book. Lots of books have been made into films multiple times and different versions offer different interpretations. A different movie will not ruin your memory of the original or make it less enjoyable. I tend to think it’s people who simply enjoy saying that the European version of everything is always superior to the American.

  25. Zoe says:

    I liked the original film better, I know a lot of Americans are averse to watching foreign films and reading subtitles, and as such, they end up missing out when they don’t watch originals and settle for remakes. I dug seeing it play out in Lisbeth’s language and culture, she strikes me as more human in the original, even though she’s written as less sociable than in the remake. She remains likeable nonetheless in the original despite her lack of social skills because she is so badass, but it feels more real to me and more consistent with what her character would be like given her life experience to be so standoffish, impulsive, and reactive, more animalistic and instinctual. In the update, she’s written to be a little more polite, i.e. “May I kill him?” Rooney Mara did an impressive job and the remake was as good as could be expected, the opening title sequence was awesome, too. But in my mind, Lisbeth Salander isn’t apologetic or polite and attempts shouldn’t be made to water her down, she’s one of the most unique characters in recent literature and one of the most interesting film heroines in years, precisely because she’s so different.

    • LeaR says:

      It’s not a remake. It’s another adaptation of the book (unless you mean that a book should only be adapted for film one time, presumably by whoever got there first).

  26. T.C. says:

    Saw both liked both but for different reasons. I didn’t think Fincher’s rape scene was as effective (not that I like watching rape scenes or anything but it was very important in setting up the story). Rooney rocked the role as much as Noomi did her version. Thought both men in both movies were just meh. Daniel Craig didn’t even TRY to use a Swedish accent just was just lazy to me. The only downside with watching Fincher’s version is that you already know the story inside out and are just waiting for this or that to happen instead of sitting back and enjoying. Well to me at least. So I recommend the movie. Yes Rooney Mara is an entitled bitch but girl can act. She just needs to know there are also other talented girls like Elizabeth Olsen (also a trust fund baby) who don’t go around sounded ungrateful and entitled, then again Sean Penn is an ass and still gets work.

  27. nan says:

    I haven’t read the books, but I’m looking forward to seeing the movie…at home when it comes out on Direct TV.

  28. Esmom says:

    “There were moments where Daniel seemed less like a journalist in over his head and more like a supremely competent British spy, though. ”

    I lol’d at this, must be Craig’s James Bond coming through! Although I did think of Blomkvist as a pretty resourceful guy.

    I’m still troubled by Craig as the actor they chose to portray him. I guess he’s the right choice, as Blomkvist himself always felt himself to be unattractive…which is how I view Craig. That being said, I’m not sure who I would pick for the role.

    Anyway, thanks for sharing…I hope I can squeeze in some “me” time to see it soon!

  29. Kimberly says:

    skip the American version it’s not edited well at all!!!!!!!
    no spoilers from me but . . .
    watch the original version, even with subtitles it’s THE ONE TO WATCH! There are copies of the orig that came out a year or so ago that has been dubbed in english if you can’t read, but don’t watch the hollywood version it’s like watching twilight. Low quality script Low quality acting

  30. Kellie says:

    I read the book, saw the Swedish version and went to see it in the states last night. It was very good but I liked the swedish version better.

  31. Camille says:

    I’m sorry but the only thing that really stood out to me in this review was this:
    “he’s lovely to look at” and it made me LOL. Have to disagree with you there Kaiser lol 😉 .

    I’ll probably check this movie out on DVD some day, otherwise I’m not all that fussed about seeing it TBH.

  32. Gretchen says:

    “*Lisbeth’s control over her own destiny was subtly taken away from book to screen. In the books, she makes several pivotal decisions that influence future plotlines. In the American film, those decisions are made by other characters – and things happen TO her, and she does less to affect her own course of action.”

    I was sooooo worried about this. Don’t get me wrong i’m going to watch it (but for free *ahem*), but I just knew this was going to happen. I was really worried that Fincher was going to turn it into torture porn, so i’m happy that didn’t happen, however I just knew some form of disempowerment of lisbeth salander was going to happen in the american version.

    The original book was called “men who hate women” and Larsson was apparently very influenced in his writing by his very feminist partner. Although the book is still problematic in areas, this overall vision definitely showed in the books. Not just in portraying violence against women as unashamedly misogynistic (no excuses or victim blaming), or indulging in some revenge fantasy, but with Lisbeth being the prime subject of the book. Not. An. Object.

    Even in the other books, when at times she barely features, Lisbeth is there. She is the soul of every book, the brains, the machinator, everything. So it really pisses me off that her discoveries and decisions are relegated to other cast, because her intelligence isn’t just part of the story, it IS the story.

    Fincher likes to shock audiences, and i suppose this is why he went for the project. But the very fact that he took away pivotal plot discoveries and turns from lisbeth just shows that he DID NOT GET the books.

    WOW. That was a feminist rant and a half….

  33. Sara says:

    I did not like the books so much. I found it hard to believe a middle aged reporter would get that much ass not to mention a little bit too much rape-revengey for my taste.

    BUT I liked the Swedish film adaptation. Lisbeth’s character will probably be a lot younger, thinner and less kick ass in the American version.

  34. crtb says:

    All that I have read is that the American version is very confusing and the story is impossible to follow. The Swedish version is supposed to be excellent. There was no reson to make another version except that Americans are to lazy to read sub-titles.

  35. LeaR says:

    I liked both the Swedish & American versions – they are both good adaptations of the book & both have their own take on the characters/story structure.

    Mara is great in the part – like Sherlock Holmes or Elizabeth Bennet, two of my other favorite literary characters, I’m thrilled to see multiple talented actresses take on the Lisbeth part.

    I am baffled by people who refuse to see Fincher’s version because a Swedish one exists. Do you also refuse to watch any recent adaptations of Sherlock Holmes stories, Jane Eyre, or Pride & Prejudice out of loyalty to previous film versions? If I really like a book, I’m open to seeing as many film versions of it as people are willing to make.

  36. edogfemme says:

    Read it. Saw the Swedish. Saw the “American”.

    I think it was an excellent adaptation. The pacing and dialogue were very Swedish. I loved the cadence of speech.

    I think people who were frustrated by focus not being on Lisbeth have forgotten how many scenes she is not in in the book.

    I was frustrated by how mature and capable Noomi Rapace seemed. I thought Rooney Mara was going to be too “pretty” but she really did get that androgynous child like look great. Lisbeth was a strong woman, but she was PLAGUED by “Man som hader kvinnor” (forgive my not having proper Swedish letters). When the misogynists continuously take your power away, you have to fight and scheme to get it back.

    I thought Craig was a great pick for a mysteriously attractive middle age character. Let’s face it, women were inexplicably drawn to Mikael Blomkvist. I think Craig has that characteristic, too. He’s not “tall, dark and handsome”, but if any of us were in a room with him I think we’d be okay taking our clothes off and huddling together for warmth, too.

    I don’t think this will be a blockbuster because of the pacing problems. I saw those pacing problems in the book, though and it was a bestseller.

  37. whatevs says:

    i’ll read the books first. adaptations can rarely match up to the book.

  38. Str8Shooter says:

    This girl is made to look so fucking BUTT UGLY in all of these stills, especially with the hideous 70s-stepchild bangs. The character does not need to look so gross, but that’s Hollywood for you..completely getting it wrong, again.

    The books..and the original movies are brilliant. Lisbeth is tough-as-nails but also attractive in the films. Here they just went for ugly.

    And Rooney Mara sounds like a CUNT in real life, too.

  39. Callumna says:

    Movie poster is ok but bleak and rapey with snow on top doesn’t do it for me these days.

    Plus — I’m over watching middle aged white dude fantasies.

    It’s just another middle aged guy with a young victim who for god knows what reason sleeps with him instead of a young hottie. Watch the middle age white dude sleep with a young girl. Watch the middle age white dude sleep with a black girl like Halle Berry. Watch the middle aged white man sleep with everyone. Bond.

    Feminist my behind.

    The last truly cool female lead for me was Sigourney Weaver in Alien.

    She and the alien were both fierce females and the Alien was so bad ass because it was a momma trying to protect babies.

    Now that’s interesting. It explores how women can be powerful and why. Even the Terminator series has a fierce chick who knows the upcoming world is going to be a horror and has to raise a son prepared for it.

    No white dude writing about some young chick getting raped and being naked all the time sleeping with a middle aged white dude. And of course he’s a writer.

    Urchin-middle aged guy-bleakness, rape, revenge and snow.

    Merry Christmas Hollywood style! Hell nawww for me.

    • Tiffany says:

      The book was written because the author saw a girl get violated by a gang of men when he was a teenager, and he did nothing to help her. This story is a fantasy of the victimized girl getting revenge on the people who brutalized her.

  40. Jacqueline says:

    Saw it and it was amazing. Lengthy just like the first. BUT the Swedish were way better and more authentic. They spoke Swedish and didnt splurge money on the budget. Noomi was more convincing but Nyqvist wasnt as emotional as Craig. It was just slower paced than I expected for a Hollywood thriller.

  41. kazoo says:

    HAHA random as hell, but I’m watching Law and Order and it’s the Rooney Mara episode. I hope her acting has improved. She sucks in this episode.

  42. deb says:

    what a frightning looking chick
    which wouldnt be so bad if she coudl act

    shes just awful

    and they wonder why america isnt going to the movies this xmas

    movies like this is why

    and second rate actresses like this is why

    saw her in an interview
    she was arrogant and really trying way to hard.

    this should have been a lifetime movie at the very most

    love daniel Craig though….

  43. iseepinkelefants says:

    I just saw it. HATED the editing and pacing. I’ve never read the books, seen the films or read any synopsis, the only thing I remember from the previews is Craig saying “help me catch a killer” so yeah knew nothing about it and I was bored to tears with the first hour and a half. I was prepared to hate it. It felt like it was made only for those that read the book, like you had to be in the know to understand it.

    Finally it picked up when they got together but it wasn’t nearly long enough. Don’t get me wrong the film was a good length (I like over two hour movies, makes me feel like I got my money’s worth) but their time together wasn’t enough to warrant their closeness at the end.
    Craig and that brat Mara had good chemistry but I felt like I missed something between them meeting and their first sex scene.

    As for the rape scene, if it’s worse in the other movie than I’m glad I saw this one. The one in this film made me uncomfortable enough.

  44. Dana says:

    I can’t believe the bias and hate towards Fincher’s version and that is coming from people who haven’t seen the American adaptation.

    The Swedish version changed Lisbeth and also kept part of the story out of the film.
    Fincher’s film is the real adaptation. Judge when you see it.

  45. Marianne says:

    I just saw the film and loved it. Actually liked it better than the Swedish version, thought Rooney was better than Noomi too.

    Your favorite cat part might have be when he/she is sleeping on Daniel’s head…but I loved when he called out “Cat!”… I laughed….so did everyone else.

    I thought it was odd that Rooney went for the accent but Daniel still sounded British.

  46. Danny Gow says:

    i think that both rooney and noomis performances where good but personally i dont think any one them captred the REAL lisbeth salander from the books. In the swedish i think they toned her down to much and she doesnt seem at all that odd or different. In the american she seems a bit insane. i know lisbeth isn’t exactly normel but she is not crazy. I think Daniel Craig captured Mikael perfectly and he is exactly how i thought he would be in the book.