The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Nothing in this movie was all that disturbing, but I'm notoriously hard to disturb, so whatever.

Anyway, I enjoyed it. I never read the books (and now have no intention of ever doing so), so the plot had some mystery to it. Overall the movie appealed to more as a character study than as an actual mystery movie, though.

The biggest complaint I had was that it was hard for me to follow what was going on. There were an awful lot of rapid scene transitions, quick close ups of computer screens, pictures and books, that were supposed to clue you in on what was going on. But I couldn't keep up with that or the huge cast of people (the family alone had like 10 different people, none of whose names I can remember). So by the end of the movie I was pretty lost.

Still, decent movie.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
The biggest complaint I had was that it was hard for me to follow what was going on. There were an awful lot of rapid scene transitions, quick close ups of computer screens, pictures and books, that were supposed to clue you in on what was going on. But I couldn't keep up with that or the huge cast of people (the family alone had like 10 different people, none of whose names I can remember). So by the end of the movie I was pretty lost.

Still, decent movie.

Hm.. in that case I might save my money. I mean, yeah, I like Fincher a lot; his stuff's always really good, but some of his stuff (like Zodiac, for example, and The Social Network) gets a little convoluted to me. And this looks like it might be kind of similar to Zodiac. And I've never seen the original or read the books, or whatever. I know nothing about it. Might just wait for Netflix. Appreciate the heads up.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Nothing in this movie was all that disturbing, but I'm notoriously hard to disturb, so whatever.

Anyway, I enjoyed it. I never read the books (and now have no intention of ever doing so), so the plot had some mystery to it. Overall the movie appealed to more as a character study than as an actual mystery movie, though.

The biggest complaint I had was that it was hard for me to follow what was going on. There were an awful lot of rapid scene transitions, quick close ups of computer screens, pictures and books, that were supposed to clue you in on what was going on. But I couldn't keep up with that or the huge cast of people (the family alone had like 10 different people, none of whose names I can remember). So by the end of the movie I was pretty lost.

Still, decent movie.

it definitely felt like a mystery movie to me...there were so many questions that came into my mind at first, then it just unraveled gradually revealing more about Harriet and that day. I was interested in how the story would end and although some details were hard to follow (such as the second arc of the movie) i thought that the director conveyed his story very effectively.

I for one was unsettled by the scenes in the movie...

Well, I've read the first two books [the third wasn't yet out in paperback] and if it moves so quickly as is being said, I'll be glad for the background.

I think I'll have to wait until DVD - no one will want to go see this with me except my Dad might... but that would be really, really awkward. He hates it when i say "oh my god!!" and sitting through all the swearing and violence and rape and sex would not be good for our relationship...

Originally posted by siriuswriter
I think I'll have to wait until DVD - no one will want to go see this with me except my Dad might... but that would be really, really awkward. He hates it when i say "oh my god!!" and sitting through all the swearing and violence and rape and sex would not be good for our relationship...

Haha, I know how you feel. My dad isn't cool, either. I have to go see stuff like this with my mom. lol. Or my girlfriend. She's the coolest, she doesn't mind a little swearing and violence.

My mom was the one who turned me on to the book.

The book is WHY she's not seeing it in theatres.

I just recently watched the original and, wow! It was so slow and looong. I have no desire to see the remake regardless of Craig and Fincher's involvement.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
Well, I've read the first two books [the third wasn't yet out in paperback] and if it moves so quickly as is being said, I'll be glad for the background.

I think I'll have to wait until DVD - no one will want to go see this with me except my Dad might... but that would be really, really awkward. He hates it when i say "oh my god!!" and sitting through all the swearing and violence and rape and sex would not be good for our relationship...

just saw this.. I paid attention from the very beginning. it is so easy to figure out from the get go.. thought that Rooney Mara played Lisbeth well... I liked it..

now will watch the original on dvd real soon

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
I'll watch it with you. You can even jump into my lap with a squeal when she whips out the giant dildo.

Oh, thank you honey-bunches-of-oats!

Except for the "whipping out the dildo" part. Wouldn't that be your turn to squeal? 😆

i wish it had been a little more "se7en" and a little less "zodiac"

The material in it is so trashy and the book is so trashy, i wish Fincher would go a little more nuts with it.

This american version is just too modestly tasteful when it should be audaciously tasteless.

Originally posted by Rapscallion
i wish it had been a little more "se7en" and a little less "zodiac"

Mm. Just as I suspected. Count me out, then. I might catch it on Netflix at some point.

Originally posted by Rapscallion
i wish it had been a little more "se7en" and a little less "zodiac"

The material in it is so trashy and the book is so trashy, i wish Fincher would go a little more nuts with it.

This american version is just too modestly tasteful when it should be audaciously tasteless.

So I take it you've seen the Swedish version then? How do you think they compare?

Went to see it today by myself because none of my friends could be convinced to come with me. 🙁

Personally I would say this version is much better than the Swedish version. The camera work / cinematography, the sound design / score and most importantly the pacing of the film are all head and shoulders above the Swedish version which makes a much more thrilling and suspenseful film. I liked the original, but 20% of it could have been cut, and it would have been a better more cohesive and concise movie. I'm not even talking about cutting out scenes or any real content, the scenes in the original just draaaaaaaaaaaaaag on for no reason what so ever, Fincher's version added stuff that wasn't in the original film and even though I think it might be a few minutes longer, it doesn't fell that way, which is important. The acting in both films is excellent but Fincher's version is a much more exciting vision with a much better sense of pace and direction than the original.

Also Rooney Mara looks more like a girl with a dragon tattoo, Noomi was defiantly a woman with a dragon tattoo. Not a big deal, but I think the casting was a bit better in that regard.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
So I take it you've seen the Swedish version then? How do you think they compare?

I agree with pretty much everything srankmissingnin said. Definitely preferred the american version although they are pretty similar. the american one is just a little slicker, more professional, better cinematography, moves a little better, and has more thoughtful performances. The difference in performances is the big difference for me. Noomi Rapace was good in the swedish one, but she was kind of this cyber-punk-badass-avenging angel. Roony Mara is much more wounded and vulnerable. She and Fincher really seem to want to bring out how traumatizing her past is. Mara's being much younger definitely helps get this across.

From a person who's read the book this movie was an intense disappointment. "Wounded and vulnerable" is just not Lisbeth Salander. She lets down her cover, but not that much, and only with Mikael, and only in a certain mood. I also didn't like how they had Lisbeth like... force sex on Mikael. That went against everything that her trauma did to her.

I think one of the main problems for me was that there was hardly any sense of the passage of time. It all seemed to be happening within a week. There were some bits that were taken from the second book, for instance Lisbeth discovering her old guardian, and visiting him at the nursing home.

With the investigation, it seemed that the things that should have been simple were complicated, and the things that should have been complicated were too simple. In the book,

Spoiler:
They are able to track down Harriet through Anita. It's exactly the way it was in the movie, with the hacker guys in the back of a van, frenzily monitoring all Anita's connections. She calls Australia, and that turns out to be where Harriet is. Harriet also becomes the CEO of the company, and the information that Henrik then gives Mikael helps him devote an entire Millenium issue to the Wennerstroms.

My friend saw it with me, she thought it was okay... but not good, not worth spending our money on, definitely. And then I told her about some of the changes [like having US "Martin" play Swedish "Mikael!"]
Ugh Mikael Bloomkvist is supposed to be old, fat, so his personality is what makes him more "attractive." He was much too handsome, much too sleek and chic and seriously, going out into the wilds of Sweden with only his business suit jacket? Someone from Sweden has got to know better! Definitely a role that someone should have taped "No Screen Idols" all over.

The set/background was good, the performances were good but not "right," plot sucked more than it was good, casting was fail, and a bitter aftertaste.... I'd give this film a whopping 2/5, only rescued by the performances and the setting. BLEAGH.

Leech, save your money.

I probably would have enjoyed the new one had I not seen the original. But the original girl was a better actress (She was just more intense during the revenge scene and other scenes), the chemistry between the girl and the guy was better (his reaction was more awkward acceptance of her which made more sense than full acceptance; the dialog just gave more meaning to their relationship such as "You know everything about me, and I know nothing about you"😉. The reveal of clues seemed more tactful in the original. The ending of the original didn't go on forever (really? Did we really need all the follow up details that

Spoiler:
the bad guy businessman who we saw all of 30 seconds had to be murdered for American audiences to be satisfied?

Spoiler:
"Oh, I hope you like **** sex."

Overall, this was a completely unnecessary remake that offered nothing new. The only thing it was good for was to dumb down the original and make it in English so they could make money off of the ignorant American audiences. I miss the good ole days of Fincher with Fight Club, Se7en, and The Game. His last few movies have been drab to me.

I'm glad I haven't read the books, then, as I enjoyed the movie quite a bit.

On the other hand though, it also kind of sucked.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
From a person who's read the book this movie was an intense disappointment. "Wounded and vulnerable" is just not Lisbeth Salander. She lets down her cover, but not that much, and only with Mikael, and only in a certain mood. I also didn't like how they had Lisbeth like... force sex on Mikael. That went against everything that her trauma did to her.

That's the entire point as you said, "only in a certain mood."
Lisbeth may have had a traumatic upbringing but there was still no denying that she enjoyed her sexual encounters, when she was in the mood & in control too.

She clearly wasn't the abused submissive victim that had flash-backs of past abuse every time she was in a sexual situation.