The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

That idea that Sweden is this fucked up society behind a seemingly perfect or idyllic facade's a big theme of all the Scandanavian crime writers of late, including Laarson.

The original Swedish title of the book is Men Who Hate Women, which goes a long way towards agreeing with what you said.

I hope the next two are just as awesome. There's so much about this movie that appealed to my tastes. I did a short review here which was written just after seeing it. So, I was way more ga-ga and now I'm just firm in my stance that it's completely awesome.

I wonder what Fincher will do with this.

I thought this film was just Eurotrash, through and through.

"Isn't violence against women terrible? Let's let the camera linger over these suffocated faces just a little longer...let's draw out this rape scene and then have it play again on the tv...all to show how horrible violence is, of course."

It just felt trashy and exploitive to me, and the mystery wasn't particularly mysterious. And the Nazi connection just seemed pulpy and silly. The only redeeming features were the two lead performances - it's not easy realistically dealing with material this over-the-top. Definitely overrated.

I thought it was a well-written, well-acted, well-directed, nasty little film.

The leads in particular were excellent, but really the whole cast was great. The scenes that were there to hurt really hurt. Its nothing exceptional, but it is a solid, dark, adult thriller.

I agree completely with all of this.
I was actually taken to see this by a girl who had read all the books. It was interesting and I had a good night with her.... But I won't be seeing her again.

You thought this film was over the top and exploitative? On the contrary I enjoyed this 'I Spit On Your Grave' mini digression. Basing a whole story on the violence men commit on women and shying away from it at the same time doesn't make much sense in my mind. And besides, the whole parole officer story showed pretty well that she wasn't the type of person that takes the bad things that happen to her lying down, not to mention setting her up as competent enough to save the day in the end.

I really didn't see what was so interesting about the mystery. It was all a bit underwhelming when it wasn't being really dark. It was also far too long much like the book.

Upon leaving the movie, I turned to my two female friends and said, "You must never go to Sweden." Good movie, well made, well acted but aside from Lisbeth's horrifying life, I don't see why it's any thing but a paint by numbers thriller.

Well, to assure you, the film and novel are *very* feminist. I think the despondency of tone you're addressing in the film has to do with the very european concept of non-glorified, non-exciting violence. While it may seem cruel, had they chosen to depict the rapes in a more concealed, less graphic manner they would've been dishonest to the act itself, turning something that is quite real, violating and cruel into a cinematic abstract. The same motivation was behind Irreversible.

I think it's an important step in cinema's maturity, to deal with the stark reality of actions, rather than treading lightly around them, at least in the case of dramas that take their characters seriously, which was the case with this film.

EDIT: To elaborate on the feminist stance, you've omitted the fact the rape victim gets her revenge by sticking, and kicking, a butt plug up her parole officer's anus, in far more graphic detail than the rape. I'd say that makes a pretty strong statement for this film having a strong feminist message.

Also, just to underline: just because a film depicts violence to women doesn't mean it agrees with it. The film depicted rapists and murderers as truly vile, perverse people, but it didn't side with them, nor did I get any entertainment value from their acts. The film also strongly counters the "misogynistic" argument by portraying a positive, equal relationship between the two lead characters.

Guys, seek out the "Wallander" swedish tv series if you liked this movie.
The show is absolutly fantastic, and the episode that had the same male lead of this movie as an antagonist was flat out perfect.

Well, I agree that it's uncomfortable viewing, but disagree that it's misanthropic (hateful of humanity). You said that it's purposefully complex, and I'd agree with you there... if the film were simply "one" thing, it would lose its power. I'd argue that all of these elements work together, in addition to its subtle story of redemption and empowerment. The finale seems to suggest that we can retrieve ourselves from the vile dregs of society and find community with people we would have never considered before. I'd say that it comes across as very humane, and even cautiously optimistic about man's prospects in this world.

The actress who plays Lisbeth looks nothing like how she is described in the books, she's too old and they really overdid the goth makeup, on the imdb page of the second movie her look is more in line with what she's supposed to look like. I liked the actor who plays Blomqvist (I saw him in another movie, a musical a while ago and thought he was great in that as well) although I felt he played the character a tad too passive in the movie.

Maybe I shouldn't have seen this at 10:30pm after working all day, but in the end, I didn't find the film to be terribly engaging, and I dosed off at least three times.

It's well made, it looks good, and is, at times, appropriately tense, but it plays like a common, not terribly well-paced thriller with a handful of decent flourishes (I'll cop to Martin Vanger's musings on murder and the photographs of the victims being singularly disturbing).

The feminist subtext seemed rather bald to me, and frankly, I found it a bit bothersome that Lisbeth is rather quickly made sexually available to Blomkvist. You can read it as Lisbeth (who I think is intimated to be bisexual out of necessity) wanting to connect with a decent male figure and going about doing so in the way most familiar to her, but I can't help but think that because she's such an exotic figure, it's her appeal to the curious male viewer that's being exploited more than anything else. In some circles they call this argument, "boner shame".

That brings me to Noomi Rapace, who is fine as Lisbeth, except when she's working that cigarette prop to the bone; her nervous chain-smoking became a rather annoying affectation, one I felt the actress was hiding behind.

Knowing little about the film before I went in, I was shocked to see where the relationship between Lisbeth and her guardian went.
That first scene where he abuses her for the first time was startling because I didn't think she was going to allow him to go that far, that at any moment she was going bite, punch, or pull something of his, but that moment never came and that had quite an impact on me as a viewer, to say nothing of their next scene together. The revenge bit that you can see around the corner was sweet, but ultimately shallow fist-pumping bait.

I can see myself watching this again, but mainly because I want to see it under conditions in which I am completely alert, just to be fair, and just to see if anything I didn't care for comes off better, but I kind of doubt it.

Just finished watching this movie on DVD, and it is refreshing to watch a suspense thriller that doesn't rely on cheap CGI or shock value to grab attention. TATTOO has great storyline, interesting characterization, and superb performance from its two leading actors to make this movie into a pleasant surprise for me. I've never read the novel and I'm glad I wasn't spoiled on the ending, and I managed not to spoiled myself from online forums about a movie for once. I've heard that Hollywood will adapt the novel as well, and I'll be curious to see how they will do it; I hope they won't try to water it down to PG-13 just so they can make a few millions more.

So I just watched this and the more I think about it the more troubling it gets.

The thing that sticks out at me is how it handles both Lisbeth and Harriet's characters. What it FEELS like to me is the product of someone who wants to discuss these things, but honestly doesn't know the first thing about them. I'm coming from an equally ignorant place, so I can't say TOO much, but the way both Lisbeth and Harriet's characters were handled feels...like more of a guess than anything. I don't really feel like the people handling those characters has the first idea of what it would be like to go through some of these situations. Again, maybe I'm missing something, but it just bothers me.

And to make it worse, the film almost feels dismissive of them - Lisbeth especially. In a film that should be about Lisbeth, or, at the very least, about these issues in general, she seems to have taken a backseat to Kalle. So much so that his journalistic redemption is given more screen time than her reunion with her mother.

I dunno...I'm still kind of thinking my way through it all right now, but as it stands - as well made as the film was (and it was - as a mystery and a thriller I was VERY on board), it's just not sitting right with me.

Eh.. The acting was strong to great, and the mechanics of the mystery plot were relatively engaging, but all in all the experience of watching this film was unpleasant on many levels and I'm not really sure that the film is good enough to have earned the right to explore the issues that it deals with. The treatment of certain issues felt very glossy, and I can definitely relate to Chewers who felt that the film dipped into a kind of seediness/trashiness that I've noticed from certain other European films

Who should be cast in the Hollywood remake?

I think Carey Mulligan and Brad Pitt would be good for the American remake.

I don't know... that's just too safe. I think it was important that the original filmmakers went with an unknown for Salander's character. But maybe an english adaptation would be too big to take such a risk? Based on looks alone, I'd say Shannyn Sossamon, but she may not be good enough as an actress, and too similar-looking.

Daniel Craig is who is in talks for Blomvkist. Apparently Carey Mulligan really wants to be Lisbeth.

I like Mulligan and I think she'll be a good Lisbeth, although after seeing the Sweden version of the movie I don't think any actress will be able to do a better job than Noomi Rapace; Noomi is simply sensational as Lisbeth and a hard act to follow.

So this film is sitting next to my computer and I'm trying to bring myself to watch it.

I read the book about a year ago and came in relatively well informed. All those worthless college classes on modern liberalism and socialism in Europe helped. I was really excited to read a book that was essentially a study of victimization and Swedish politics but all wrapped up in a murder mystery.

So reading this has me worried.

This was something that took me completely out of the book. Only I didn't read it as boner shame, as much as the author getting his Mary Sue on. Blomkvist is based on Laarson, and having Blomkvist-and therefore the author-being the only man Lisbeth willingly sleeps with just gave me an ick factor all the way around.

Oh and Blomkvist gets with every other sexually attractive woman in the book too. I wouldn't have been as bothered if the relationship between character and creator wasn't so explicit.

So my question to people who have seen the movie and aren't my father (that man adores it to a cultish degree): is the Mary Sue nature of Blomkvist toned down in the movie?

Re: The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

I went ahead and watched it. Much awkwardness abounded when someone walked in during the rape scene.

Maybe I'm a bad feminist but the film definitly confirmed my feelings. This book/movie feels like a misogyny trying very earnestly to be feminism. Up thread someone mentioned it seemed to be a movie about feminism and victimzation written by someone who doesn't know anything about these subjects and that seems an apt description.

First--the systematic victimization of Lisbeth. The film does a piss poor job of setting up her character. We see her fight off and violently react to some jerks on the train, but then she turns meek when faced with her guardian. The book tries to explain away this quirk by giving her this long and traumatic history. The rape is supposed to be the final straw in her life as a victim, only I didn't buy it in the book and I don't buy it here. You can't paint her as this brilliant, uber capable, violent femme and then have the rape go down the way it does. Rape is about control, and what we've seen beforehand is that Lisbeth is about control. How she is raped and how she reacts to the rape seem discordant with the character we see throughout the rest of the film and in the later books. The shit storm she faced early in her life was meant to be a catalyst. It's how she became the uber badass that has critics everywhere hailing her as the future of heroines in film. So that rape? It feels unnecessary. It feels exploitative.

Second--The Bloomkvist/Salander affair. From the get go these two characters are painted as two sides of the same coin. They're meant to complement each other. Which is why I'm deeply bothered by how their "necessary" violations occur. By the end of the film they are both crusaders. Only Bloomkvist starts the film as one. Hell he has to retire and take a job in the permafrost because he's such a white and shining knight. It's why the call him Kalle! It is Bloomkvist's need to be a crusader that leads to his violations. First at his job and then later physically and sexually at the hands of the killer.

Meanwhile Salander drifts through life until her very brutal wake up call at the hands of her guardian. It is the guardian, and Bloomkvist that draw her out, and that force her to shed her guise as victim and become crusader. Bloomkvist begins the film enlightened and Salander needs the help of others (specifically men) to gain her enlightenment.

I'm not sure really what Laarson intended with this dichotomy, but the face value is so repellant to me that I have a hard time seeking the truth.

Third--revenge and victimization masquerading as feminism. Feminism is about choice and equality. 9 times out of 10 when someone identifies themselves as a feminist it is because they believe that everyone is equal and everyone is entitled to their choices. The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is NOT about that. It's very much about fighting back. I mean did Laarson just mainline a bunch of militant third wave feminist literature before writing this book?

Fourth--the Mary Sue problem. Not actually a problem in the film! I almost wished I'd seen the film before I read the book and well before I read about the author.

Fifth--The Deep and Brooding Misogynistic Underbelly of Sweden. Again I guess I'm dumb, but I don't get it. Salander and Harriet are meant to be the victims yeah? They're supposed to be Sweden's dark secret, but their stories are NOT typical. And the very ordinary women we DO see (the sister and the editor/girlfriend) are happy and successful.

I like the idea of unveiling nasty cultural secrets, but I don't think this film/book did that.

It's a good story though. And it had the bonus of making me want to watch Silence of the Lambs yet again. Now there is an excellent film that explores violence and women (but not nearly as purposely as Girl With the Dragon Tattoo).

It's a standard thriller film thrown in a blender with a little European art film. This is supposedly deep, but what I saw was basically brainless, but in a nice suit and using long words!

That's overstating it a bit. Vanger the old rich guy from the first one, Lisbeth's boss, her old 'probation officer', the other guys at Millennium especially the young journalist in the second movie, the kick-boxer guy, even the cops are portrayed sympathetically. But even discarding that, since these are stories about Lisbeth and Blomqvist taking down people who harm women it's logical that the other main characters are 'bad men'.

What is starting to bother me about these films is that they are making Lisbeth a bit too competent at everything.

Re: The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

The woman is the best hacker in the world all thanks to her trusty old G4 Powerbook.
That tickled me.

Walter Chaw pretty much nailed my feelings on the film, expanding upon things I mentioned in my first post. It's quite difficult for me to wrap my mind around why so many people like it.

I don't get the love either. It's decent but certainly not groundbreaking.

The number of feminists websites that have gone gaga over Salander is a little startling. Which is why I've spent so much time trying to see what they've seen.

I'm now convinced I'm the sane one and they've been trippin'.

I wanted to ask, but forgot to yesterday when I made my post on the film:

What is going on with the guardian system in Sweden? It seems positively demented that someone could assume control of your finances like that. Ugh. Was he abusing his power in that respect, or is Sweden ok with people stealing your money?

I really liked it. Even if it felt a little longer than it should be. The mystery really worked and the direction, acting and cinematography are top level.

I'll be looking forward to the next 2 films.

The Girl With The Dragon Tatoo is...Awesome. My sister read the first two books, and she didn't even know there was a film, already in theaters. So, we went to my local...Redbox. The only negative, is that apparantly the Redbox, didn't like the film, and would not let me return it today! It is one of the few thrillers that held my interest, and I loved seeing Lisbeth, rescue her guypal, instead of the other way around. My sister and I will probably see the sequel in a few weeks.

Watched The Girl With A Dragon Tattoo this weekend. I loved the mystery and the way the clues were structured. I also really liked the portrayals of all the characters, especially Lisbeth. I can't wait until the next two movies show up in my neck of the woods.

Why wasn't this reviewed on Chud? Great movie.

Yeah, they pretty much ignore good, international films on this site.

Loved this flick. That "Euro-Trash" comment up there ticks me off, though. I don't understand how someone can miss the point so completely.

Quick poll for the peanut gallery: This is on the instant queue, but I only have a Wii so it won't be in HD. Is the film visually impressive enough to wait on a mailed Blu-ray copy?

Definitely agree there. "The Girl Who Played With Fire" wasn't even a disappointment. It was clear from the opening scene that it wasn't even trying.

Hmm. . . I watched it in HD, and, at times, it does look very good, but I wouldn't say it is crucial to wait on the Blu-Ray, no.

The most shocking part to me was that it just kept getting worse. The less-than-DTV-kick-boxing fight with the shitty lighting? I nearly turned the damn thing off.

I don't think that's quite fair. I've been turned on to a few, including "Let the Right One In."

I meant that chud often doesn't pay attention to international films that don't get mainstream distribution. "Let the Right One In" had a pretty strong theatrical run here. A lot of great films from asia and just about any output from eastern europe have been overlooked, simply because they don't get a good release (but are generally available on video through foreign websites).

I feel so lost.

Better to hit up TwitchFilm for the foreign releases. They do a great job covering all the odd little films you can only get via import.

I loved this film. I didn't find any of the disturbing elements to be overly manipulative, exploitative, or disingenuous. For an otherwise glossy, clear-cut mystery/drama, I thought the sexual abuse and violence was refreshingly honest without completely alienating sensitive viewers. The "lingering camera" mentioned above never felt like a glamorizing force to me; it lingered no longer on the scenes of brutality than it did on other scenes. It's not like dialog-heavy scenes felt shortchanged or rapidly-paced in favor of showcasing the violence.