The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2009)

Why did the trilogy blow up?
Don't quote me on this, but I think the timing was everything—Stieg Larsson passed away right after the first one hit, even though he finished the other two. Everybody wants a piece of the pie once the author is gone😢. It became a cultural phenomenon. Some people love the genre, some don't, whatever works for you.
And why did the movie work?
Rooney Mara. She basically stepped right out of the pages; I bet most fans who read the series wouldn't dream of saying anyone else IS Lisbeth. The movie itself isn't bad either. I found myself squinting at the screen just to make sure I didn't miss a single detail. It pulls you in. Everything is paced well, even with the necessary cuts. The ending feels rushed—like Lisbeth just grabbed the cash and vanished into the sunset or whatever—but the point was still to nail Wenenstorma.Al. Doesn't matter much.

It's baffling that Americans felt the need to remake it. Honestly, I'm pretty sure they just couldn't be bothered to read subtitles.🙄
I'll give the remake a shot soon, though. Maybe I'll end up being wrong. Giving it a chance.

I never judge a movie based on the book, and I hope others don't either. Obviously, not everyone is going to like it. To each their own... right?😉

It’s just a basic, easy-to-swallow rom-com. Luc Besson would have loved to direct this. Honestly, the Swedish film is twice as good, maybe even three times over. It’s no surprise some people lose their minds over the American version just because it looked like it had a slightly bigger budget. I mean, you've got that James Bond-style opening sequence, you've even got James Bond himself looking sharp in a nice jacket, plus we have Moneypenny played by Robin Wright, and even that old inventor looks like a legend played by Plummer. Even the villain is instantly recognizable since he's played by that famous Swedish actor who wasn't in the original. And the lead actress is two classes above the one in the Swedish version, but hey, maybe she's in a relationship with the director in the American version or something, so now everything is supposedly "dark" and deep. 🙂

About a week ago, I started hearing all this noise about how men are essentially pigs, and how feminism is apparently the ultimate cinematic standard based on some book by a rather feminine Swedish journalist. The plot supposedly involves some heavily tattooed, ultra-feminist, lesbian protagonist investigating crimes—while inevitably falling for a "good guy," liberal type—and the villains are always a convenient mix of misogynists, Nazis, and powerful old white men (all at once). Well, that exact film aired on PBS today.

It’s not that I didn't give the movie a fair shake (did I mention there were supposed to be lesbians 🙂 ), but once I laid eyes on an even uglier version of Trinity (how is that even possible?) sporting a bull ring in her nose 🙂

I couldn't finish it. ☕

Carol Diaz said:About a week ago, I started hearing all this noise about how men are essentially pigs, and how feminism is apparently the ultimate cinematic standard based on some book by a rather feminine Swedish journalist. The plot supposedly involves some heavily tattooed, ultra-feminist, lesbian protagonist investigating crimes—while inevitably falling for a "good guy," liberal type—and the villains are always a convenient mix of misogynists, Nazis, and powerful old white men (all at once). Well, that exact film aired on PBS today.

It’s not that I didn't give the movie a fair shake (did I mention there were supposed to be lesbians 🙂 ), but once I laid eyes on an even uglier version of Trinity (how is that even possible?) sporting a bull ring in her nose 🙂

I couldn't finish it. ☕

But you just had to comment on the movie, didn't you? 🤦

The movie was alright. I didn't read the first book in The Hunger Games series, just the others, so I know Stieg Larsson loves to clutter things up with a bunch of side characters—which they actually cut from the film, so it moves fast. Honestly, I was shocked when I saw people saying it's 2.5 hours long; I thought it was barely over an hour 😲
It felt a little spoiled for me since I finished the rest of the trilogy, and the killer from the first book gets mentioned at the end of the third one, so I already knew who 🙂 was. Plus, the whole thing with the Bible was super obvious. But overall? Decent flick. A nice break from those typical American action movies that I absolutely can't stand.

Fincher's version is easily three times better.
His take on Lisbeth is way more convincing too
The Swedish Lisbeth just feels pale and off, totally unconvincing..
And Ceaig is better, not to mention how much better everything is shot under Fincher, and directed the same way.

Daniel Kelly57 said:It’s just a basic, easy-to-swallow rom-com. Luc Besson would have loved to direct this. Honestly, the Swedish film is twice as good, maybe even three times over. It’s no surprise some people lose their minds over the American version just because it looked like it had a slightly bigger budget. I mean, you've got that James Bond-style opening sequence, you've even got James Bond himself looking sharp in a nice jacket, plus we have Moneypenny played by Robin Wright, and even that old inventor looks like a legend played by Plummer. Even the villain is instantly recognizable since he's played by that famous Swedish actor who wasn't in the original. And the lead actress is two classes above the one in the Swedish version, but hey, maybe she's in a relationship with the director in the American version or something, so now everything is supposedly "dark" and deep. 🙂

Hahhaha. 😂

By the way, I watched the Swedish version. I actually liked it.
I haven't read the book, and I have zero interest in watching the American version. Mostly because of the lead actor, but everything else about it seems off too.

Both movies are honestly great.
The Swedish film is a bit better. 😁
I honestly think the Swedish version hits way harder. It’s got this much more intense, moody atmosphere that really pulls you in. Plus, the way the characters connect feels so much more earned. In the Swedish version, Liz and Michael slowly build that connection as a byproduct of the investigation over time. But in the American one? It’s like they just happen to fall into the same frame together. It feels rushed.
Fincher's pacing might actually be a bit tighter. There's practically zero filler in his movies.

Ali, anyway... I don't want to split hairs here. Both are honestly great.

I caught a Swedish film on PBS the other day, and honestly, it was great. Sure, the ending is a bit goofy, but I didn't mind at all—I really enjoyed the ride. It didn't feel dragged out, and the atmosphere was spot on, perfectly captured. To be blunt, I couldn't stand the character Lisbeth, and I don't really get why everyone is obsessing over Rooney Mara, but even that didn't ruin my overall impression. The movie itself is solid.
In a week or two, once things quiet down a bit, I'm going to hit the theater to check out Fincher's version.

Rebecca Sanders2 said:I caught a Swedish film on PBS the other day, and honestly, it was great. Sure, the ending is a bit goofy, but I didn't mind at all—I really enjoyed the ride. It didn't feel dragged out, and the atmosphere was spot on, perfectly captured. To be blunt, I couldn't stand the character Lisbeth, and I don't really get why everyone is obsessing over Rooney Mara, but even that didn't ruin my overall impression. The movie itself is solid.
In a week or two, once things quiet down a bit, I'm going to hit the theater to check out Fincher's version.

The movie is decent enough, except for the female lead—she’s totally unlikable and comes off as just plain gritty. As far as the writing goes, I found it a bit hard to swallow, especially when they start digging into financial records from fifty years ago. Maybe—and I highly doubt this—but perhaps there's some rule out there requiring those documents to be kept for half a century, though I don't think that would fly here in the States.

wearyowl29 said:The movie is decent enough, except for the female lead—she’s totally unlikable and comes off as just plain gritty. As far as the writing goes, I found it a bit hard to swallow, especially when they start digging into financial records from fifty years ago. Maybe—and I highly doubt this—but perhaps there's some rule out there requiring those documents to be kept for half a century, though I don't think that would fly here in the States.

I love it when people nitpick the tiny details instead of actually watching the damn movie. 🙄
The guy literally said they keep all the financial books because it's an internal rule for their family business, not because of some legal mandate or whatever.

My current Stieg Larsson status update... 🙏

- finished the first Swedish film
- watched Fincher's version
- read the first book
- currently halfway through the second one
- still have the rest of the Swedish movies lined up to watch

Which movie is better? The Swedish one, obviously! And which Sally is superior? Rooney Mara, hands down! Why? Well, I already laid it all out in "that other" thread—I really don't want to repeat myself... 🙂

rustywalker42 said:I love it when people nitpick the tiny details instead of actually watching the damn movie. 🙄
The guy literally said they keep all the financial books because it's an internal rule for their family business, not because of some legal mandate or whatever.

Honestly, those little details are exactly what make a movie—and life itself—feel real.

Finished all three books, watched all three Swedish films—even rewatched the first one twice (once last year and again when it was on TV)—and just caught Fincher's version a couple weeks ago.

I honestly expected Fincher's take to be a bust, but I actually liked it. Then I rewatched the Swedish version and decided it’s still better.

The Swedish films handle the plot much smoother; they stick closer to the source material and actually bother to explore the side plots and relationships (like the newsroom dynamics or the guardian situation). Fincher cut out so much stuff that I don't even get how his version ended up being longer. And why on earth would you change the ending? Basically, if you haven't read the books, you'll have a much easier time following the story in the Swedish films.
And yeah, you can tell which one had the bigger budget.

There’s one specific detail in the Swedish film that really rubs me the wrong way—the fact that Lisbeth reached out to Michael first. That just isn't how it goes in the books, and honestly, seeing her act like that feels totally out of character for her...

wearyowl29 said:The movie is decent enough, except for the female lead—she’s totally unlikable and comes off as just plain gritty. As far as the writing goes, I found it a bit hard to swallow, especially when they start digging into financial records from fifty years ago. Maybe—and I highly doubt this—but perhaps there's some rule out there requiring those documents to be kept for half a century, though I don't think that would fly here in the States.

I agree with the bolded part, and honestly, the whole finance thing works if you take what rustywalker42 said into account.

I liked the movie; it wasn't boring, and if anyone is looking for a modern crime thriller, I'd definitely recommend this one. 🤷
I haven't read the books and have zero intention of doing so, but I watched the film because a friend told me it was way too slow. 😁

wearyowl29 said:The movie is decent enough, except for the female lead—she’s totally unlikable and comes off as just plain gritty. As far as the writing goes, I found it a bit hard to swallow, especially when they start digging into financial records from fifty years ago. Maybe—and I highly doubt this—but perhaps there's some rule out there requiring those documents to be kept for half a century, though I don't think that would fly here in the States.

Well, if that’s how you feel, then the Swedish creators really nailed it... because in the books, the characters actually think she's messy and they question her hygiene too... she’s basically rude to everyone, honestly... it’s just that only a tiny handful of people are smart or empathetic enough to see what’s actually going on beneath the surface...

Morgan Rodriguez57 said:Well, if that’s how you feel, then the Swedish creators really nailed it... because in the books, the characters actually think she's messy and they question her hygiene too... she’s basically rude to everyone, honestly... it’s just that only a tiny handful of people are smart or empathetic enough to see what’s actually going on beneath the surface...

She triggers such strange, almost repulsive emotions that the average viewer just can't bring themselves to care about all the crap happening to her—if that's the case, I'd say they missed the mark there.

And let's be real, it isn't about being "dirty" on the outside; it's about something internal, because it's our own reaction inside ourselves that makes us feel that way.

The Swedish version is actually amazing! I’ve always had a soft spot for Swedish cinema. My only real gripe is the soundtrack.

The American remake is great too, though since it was directed by David Fincher, I kind of expected it to land perfectly. The soundtrack is killer! Rooney Mara is good, but maybe not quite on the level of Noomi Rapace...

wearyowl29 said:Honestly, those little details are exactly what make a movie—and life itself—feel real.

If you want pure realism, stick to documentaries. Stop skimming through movies just to find things to complain about and actually pay attention.

Does my point finally make sense now that you've actually read it?

wearyowl29 said:She triggers such strange, almost repulsive emotions that the average viewer just can't bring themselves to care about all the crap happening to her—if that's the case, I'd say they missed the mark there.

And let's be real, it isn't about being "dirty" on the outside; it's about something internal, because it's our own reaction inside ourselves that makes us feel that way.

The director nailed it. You, and unfortunately most people, just see her as that character and ignore everything she’s been through—being assaulted as a child, spending half her life in psych wards, being assaulted again as an adult. Given all that, why wouldn't she be "different"?
Maybe she’d be easier to relate to if she wore pigtails and pink dresses and acted like a cuddly kitten. 🙄