Carl Bennett4 said:In Fincher's version, some scenes drag out longer (like when Michael is inside the house before Martin captures him). I’d say the original version was more minimalist. Now I probably need to rewatch Fincher's cut just to refresh my memory since it's been about a year since I last saw it. Either way, I liked both, though the original might be slightly better 😍
Personally, I think the American version goes way too minimal sometimes. It makes all those side plots and characters from the books feel super shallow. To me, the American versions are missing a ton of context. Fincher stuck much closer to the book regarding the Wennestar scandal, how Henrik Vanger Mikael Blomkvist convinced him to take the case, and that whole cover story for why he’s even in Stockholm in the first place (writing Vanger's biography). Plus, the dynamic between Mikael Blomkvist and Erik Berger (who is huge for the first and subsequent books), or how Mikael and Lisbeth-aggressive actually met—that was a great scene in the book and the American movie, but they messed it up in the other version. Then there's that brutal detail about the cat Mikael looked after (totally gone in the American version), and honestly, tons of details that add layers to the tension. Not to bring it up again, but they also cut his daughter's character in the American version. I just remembered that in the American version, Lisbeth doesn't really have feelings for Mikael beyond some physical attraction, whereas in the book she actually falls for him. Fincher captured that right at the end when she went to give him his jacket and got hurt seeing him with Erik Berger. That's massive for their relationship dynamic in the later books/movies.
Look, I’m not even gonna try to convince anyone on this forum that I’ve actually read those books—they're easily some of my favorite crime thrillers ever. When I said "everything else," I was talking about all those little details from the first book where Fincher stuck much closer to Larsson's original than he did with that whole thing involving Michael's daughter. But whatever, it doesn't matter. To me, the book version of Lisbeth Salander feels more like Fincher's vision than anything else, and that's just my take. It's all about those tiny nuances. If you don't agree, you don't agree.
Daniel Perez6 said:Wait, how did he stay faithful to the books when they already made a movie based on the first one? 😬
You clearly haven't read the books. 😍
Sorry, but quit telling me I haven't read the books when I basically know them by heart. Besides, where did I even say Fincher made the 2nd and 3rd parts? I was talking about the Swedish versions of the 2nd and 3rd installments. Meant the book, not the books—my bad.
Daniel Perez6 said:Did you actually read the books? Like, did you finish all three parts, watch the movie, and then decide to drop this take? 😲
I figured you were joking. 🙂 Because, honestly, Noomi practically walked right off the pages of those books. Oh, absolutely! 🙂
It’s not even a question—all three books are sitting right on my desk. Guess we weren't reading the same books then. In the novels, Lisbeth is described as someone who almost certainly has Asperger's, which Rooney Mara played way better than Noomi Rapace (not that Noomi is to blame, really; it feels more like the director wanted a more Lisbeth-aggressive version instead of the slightly autistic-vulnerable vibe she has in the books and how Rooney nailed it). Plus, physically, Lisbeth is supposed to look like a pale, skinny fifteen-year-old boy, whereas Noomi looks much stronger, darker, and obviously older.
Patrick Martin said:Come on, man, give me some actual reasons why Fincher's movie or Lisbeth is supposedly better than the Swedish one. It’s basically just a rip-off, there's barely any difference between them.🤷
There are tons of book details that got changed in the Swedish versions too, and the books were shortened (especially the second and third movies, which felt pretty shallow). For example, did you know Mikael Blomquist has a daughter? Her role was huge in helping him figure out what those numbers next to the names meant—it wasn't just Lisbeth randomly guessing it was a quote from The Bible. Honestly, I think Fincher just tweaked the ending a bit and kept everything else straight from the books.
Patrick Martin said:Man, what a waste. I went and watched the Fincher version first (if you can even call it that 🙄) just so I could sit down right now and watch the actual real deal. I honestly don't get how someone can be such a total moron that they decide to make a literal carbon copy of this movie within such a tiny window of time. Seriously though, this flick isn't just twice as good as Fincher's rip-off—it's three times better. The whole thing centers on Noomi, and she absolutely crushed it. She basically carried the entire movie on her back (honestly, makes sense why Ridley Scott tapped her for Prometheus) The directing is more than solid. It’s actually kind of tripping me out because I felt like I’d already seen everything in Fincher's blatant plagiarism 😠 The acting feels real, which is a huge plus for me—unlike that fake-sounding Daniel Craig vibe. They nailed the important stuff way better than Fincher did, too. Like, the dynamic with the guardian, the chemistry between the two leads... just all the resolutions feel much more well-executed.
And that ending? Total icing on the cake.
10/10
If you actually read the books, you'd realize Fincher's version is actually the better one and stays truer to Stieg Larsson. Noomi Rapace is a great actress, but her Lisbeth isn't Lisbeth from the books at all. It's almost like a different character. Fincher did a waaaay better job. Even my friend from Sweden says so.
Watched this over the weekend. Definitely not the kind of movie you should take seriously. It’s clearly meant to be a trashy B-movie production, just with a massive budget. I actually had fun with it. Fichtner was great, and Amber Heard looked stunning.
This remake is a complete joke. It’s missing all that dread from the original, and the kill scenes don't even come close to topping the classics—I wasn't even startled once... Not to mention this new Freddy has zero charisma, his voice is trash, he lacks any dark humor, and that mask is a total disaster. Just a bunch of burnt aliens.
Even with all that money, Tony Stark is just another regular guy. I guess his heart and that shrapnel are his Achilles' heel—pretty much every superhero has one. 😉
This movie is so transparently stupid and predictable—it’s absolute trash. I have zero clue how Ewan McGregor and Hugh Jackman even agreed to be part of this nonsense.
^^Good luck. I know someone with that diagnosis and honestly, they were one of the most difficult people I’ve ever dealt with in my life... Anyway, we don't talk anymore because it just became impossible.
That movie was absolute garbage. Honestly, just boring and pointless. No backstory on those divers, zero logic, and no explanation for anything. What a waste.