The Girl With A Dragon Tattoo - 2011

This English-language adaptation of the Swedish novel by Stieg Larsson follows a disgraced journalist, Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig), as he investigates the disappearance of a wealthy patriarch's niece from 40 years ago. He is aided by the pierced, tattooed, punk computer hacker named Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara). As they work together in the investigation, Blomkvist and Salander uncover immense corruption beyond anything they have ever imagined (plot).

What is hidden in snow, comes forth in the thaw (Great Tagline!), I was really looking forward to The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo ever since I learned that David Fincher had been attached to, First i didn't see the Swedish version or read the novel, so i can't say if this film best than the first version, or the adaptation was best than the novel!, so i will talk about what i saw in "Fincher Film".

About the film, without a Spoilers words, I completely loved it, I usually like thrillers and mysteries, but this one is even better. It's not only thriller, it's also drama and the characterization is strong and it shakes you all the time along. The plot actually contains two story lines, Vanger family and Lisbeth Salander, which eventually clash together, and each is fantastic by itself. Story is intriguing, it doesn't back out one bit from telling the ugly truth and it doesn't even soften it. It says straight in your face everything you need to know. With no sugar-coding at all.


Now the Acting : I want to say about this movie is Rooney Mara's performance, she knocks it out of the park portraying Lisbeth Salander, she captured the mystery, the strangeness, the darkness, the out-of-the- norm personality that this character had. She was absolutely fantastic, she was really great and when you see her expressions you will feel her in the darker parts of this movie, which we'll get to in a moment, Daniel Craig is great as usual and there is great chemistry between him and Mara. Christopher Plummer, as little as he's in the movie, does a great job as well, in fact all the actors do. This is a really well acted movie.


David Fincher has put his trademark darkness to fantastic use. Whether its sweeping shots of freezing, snow covered Sweden or wonderfully eerie interiors Fincher creates an unsettling atmosphere that is unrelenting and technically perfect. With Fincher i've learnt to expect a beautifully shot film and this is no exception, within this film are some of his greatest images. Regarding the disturbing nature of some scenes, Fincher is wise enough to show them in all their horror but doesn't stop to linger or exploit.

Finally, this film is absolutely amazing, it does in my opinion, despite speculation, the movie moves at a break neck speed from the beautiful opening sequence, wonderfully reminiscent of Fight Club all the way through an astonishing piece of movie making to the end, definitely on of the best in 2011, stop thinking and when you see Fincher in the poster what ..what do you expect from him?Masterpiece.

5/5

I agree that this is a fantastic movie. If I could say anything bad about it though, it's that it veered away from the original novel somewhere the end, but then it came right back and picked up the pace again. Those who've never read the book will overlook this, but it does distract those who have read. However, it's nothing that takes away from this well acted, beautifully shot, and overall outstanding film. I saw and liked the Swedish version, but this one kept my attention longer.

I consider the 2009 original to be one of the best films in the last ten years.

__________________
Have you ever held a lion in your arms? I have. He smelled funky.

I love the opening credits, very Bond like and memorable. The technical aspect of the film is superior to the Swedish version, as expected with Fincher. My problem is that I didn't feel the mystery like the first, it's because I knew what was going on and I still found it hard to keep track of every family member.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

I'm a big fan of David Fincher and Trent Reznor so I enjoyed the movie overall. But I thought the first half was a bit dragged out and was wondering when they were going to finally get to the point. Great score though.

This movie has got to be one of the best I've seen in a long time. Rooney over kills every other actor in this movie. she is amazing in this

I loved this film.. & I love the previous sweded version too..
& I also like D. Craig, but I wish somebody else was cast instead of him.. Someone less muscular perhaps..

Halfway through. So far this is lolbad

Having allready seen the original Swedish trilogy and having liked it, I was wondering if the re-make would better it.
I have to admit that the new cinematography was superb and that Mara's acting was worth the nomination.

I love this film,it gave me a deep impression.

Hokay essentially what this boils down to is a horrible script...aside from what I personally felt was an incredibly useless and magniloquent opening credits.

Problem 1: Setting is in Sweden, accents are pretty bad. Why? It's not a swedish film, why are all the magazines, newspapers, etc. in swedish, they don't even pronounce the names or towns correctly. Plus Fincher even said in an interview he doesn't understand why people live in Sweden because of the climate. What a fool.

Problem 2: Mystery. Or the deficiency. The script is littered with sequences that are trying too hard to mimic the source material instead of pay attention to what made it gripping: the source material had mystery via fragmentations of information given to the audience so it turned into an interactive experience for everyone. This film fails on that completely; the instance where Mikael's daughter (I questioned her existence until I realized she was a tool for this) helps him with a final hint far too long into the film (which, at that point, no one was given the impression Mikael was really trying to do anything), and then Lisbeth takes it and breaks it in like 3 minutes. Not exciting at all, especially for being 2.5 hours. Also, there's no gritty realism feel. There's lots of grittiness but it is so over-polished, and turns the film into something distant, which was not at all what the source material intended.

Problem 3: Missing plot points. For example, the Vagner history is practically missing and Henrik doesn't elaborate on his relationship with Harriet to anyone, let alone to Mikael. What. Talk about depersonalized. What is there to latch onto with that? NOTHING and now onto a huge issue

Problem 4: Lisbeth. Not going to comment on acting, she had some good moments, some bad, overall even. The script is once again at fault. Speaking of missing plot points, she had next to no back story aside from, what, a line? Instead she was presented as some wannabe badass who just happened to be good at hacking. She also comes across as arrogant yet swayed and a pushover...rather than fairly complex, fearless, and balanced, adjusted albeit somewhat stubborn. All of this takes away the intrigue of the character; her backstory, her emotional complexity, these were literally absent for the audience to explore and thus the film essentially ruined one of the better literary characters in recent memory.

Problem 5: This whole story is culturally irrelevant to the states. Morally and politically, no one will gain anything from this film like one could with the books. All intellect disappeared, all potential discussion now vapor. Not surprising.



Once again the remake blows chunks. I hope to a god I don't believe in they don't produce the next two.

You made some good points but it's like you are criticking a book. It's not a book. It's a movie and it's visual. The characters can't be all you want them to be in a two hour movie. Sure the plot had it's faults and lapses but I choose to disregard it in favor of the cinematagrophy. And what, do you think Mara's performance was just average? That's why she was nominated for best actress ?
And you can bet your bottom dollar that the whole trilogy will be revamped, so expect to not see the other two, but they will be there for others to see.

Well, most of the film is dialogue, and the cinematography is based in what the script established, therefore your criticism is unfounded, especially considering I'm not critiquing it like a book and especially since the film isn't told visually. I thought the characters in the swedish film developed fine within the allotted time, so the length wasn't the issue.

It had good and bad points, I'm not labeling the performance. I don't care if she was nominated for female of the year, awards don't account for anything of artistic integrity.

The point is that film is a visual experience. The quality of the cinematogarphy is not based on what the script established. You can have ten different camera men shoot the same script and not one cinematography will be the same.
There are all kinds of awards, and people may disagree on an Oscar winner but Oscar nominations are are usually given for artistic ability and integrity.
Irregardless, I felt that Mara's performance was great, even though I liked Naomi in the original.

I've seen both versions of this movie, and even if Fincher's is less true to the novel, it was certainly the better movie in most every way imaginable I can think of. If the American version had script problems, the Swedish one had much more script problems because they are both the same length but the American one seems much shorter, even if I find it more complex. I only read winter's review once, but my initial opinion is that it was entirely pre-fabricated and seems to parallel all the problems he finds with the remake. In other words, if you make your mind up before you watch a movie, you have only yourself to blame (or thank occasionally) for what you take away from it. This isn't meant to be that serious a critique - it's just an initial impression, but it hasn't been formed in a vacuum.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

She likes Noomi, not Bible world.

I stand corrected- Noomi Rapace. But I'm not a vakra Swenska fliika.

My Noomi. Isn't she sweet?

Mark if that was true I wouldn't have watched the movie. The only reason I watch things like this is to see if I'm proven wrong. Problem is I'm usually not but the point is that I'm open minded enough to accept when I'm proven wrong. You're free to believe whatever you want.

Sounds like winter wanted a carbon copy of the book. The original Swedish version is there for that.

I liked the remake better, it's much more suspenseful, it has better pacing and is actually atmospheric. It FEELS like a film rather than a TV film.

The 'who's the better Lisbeth' debate is up for grabs. I like both actresses and both did an excellent job. If you put a gun to my head I would probably say Noomi, but I kinda fancy Noomi a lot these days soo..but Mara's Lisbeth was a nice little contrast in that she was more vulnerable than Noomi even though she had ways of handling herself. Noomi would headbutt a thug no questions asked, Mara would ask for permission first. I thought it was a nice spin on the character.