[Movies] Help me understand why Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is good

[vindicatorx]

Watch the original and/or read the book. The US version is a remake of an adaption of a book. How in gods name could you expect THAT to be good? It's a hand me down of a hand me down.

Yet it is so much better then the swedish version in my opinion. I'm guessing the OP is under 18 just by the fact that they obviously don't have the attention span to follow the movie. Who knew a dramatic mystery picture wouldn't be a Michael Bay type movie?

---------- Post added 2012-01-28 at 12:36 AM ----------

how do the rape scenes add to the film ? in the film, lizbeth is a minor character; blomkvist is the protagonist. the rape scenes are just a sub-plot about how lizbeth gets her finances in a mess. The first 40 minutes of the film are completely unbearable and then we see 2 rape scenes.

This is where knowing what happens in the other films is advantageous you are unaware Blomkvist has a minor roll in the following 2 books. Also the rape scene, is used to make you empathetic towards the character.

[Gestopft]

how do the rape scenes add to the film ? in the film, lizbeth is a minor character; blomkvist is the protagonist. the rape scenes are just a sub-plot about how lizbeth gets her finances in a mess. The first 40 minutes of the film are completely unbearable and then we see 2 rape scenes.

As I said in post #9, those events become more important in parts 2 and 3. This movie is part one of a trilogy, and introduces characters and events that become more integral to the plot as the overall story progresses.

[Neeshka]

That's a little like asking why Sauron is in the first LotR movie, I feel. Lizbeth is the protagonist of the entire series - or so I've heard. I haven't actually read the books or seen the other movies, so I can't say for sure.

Nope, LoTR is a relatively simple and tight narrative. The subplots are always subplots and don't really take over everything else. Also LoTR, the book is a classic; a masterpiece, a defining work in science fiction and will be remembered in literary history forever pretty much. It's unfair to compare it to pulp fiction/airport reading type novels imo.

LoTR is about the adventure of a small inconsequential person in a huge fantasy world; his quest to destroy a ring and in the process defeat a very great evil. Sauron is the main antagonist behind every bad thing in middle earth; he's quite important in fellowship. Nowhere near a minor character.

[Zaerick]

Correct me if im wrong but I am 90% sure that in the bookthe missing girl they were looking for was found in Australia married to a rancher, I don't remember the details since I read them a few years back. I rated the books as my top series of all time and was disappointed at the movie.

[yuca247]

All I can say is the story starts off slow both in the books and in the movies. Even still, the movies do not do the books justice imo.

The story is ok in the first book, good in the second book, and great in the third. When I saw the movies though I felt like they didn't capture enough of the story which is usually the case.

[Neeshka]

I'm guessing the OP is under 18 just by the fact that they obviously don't have the attention span to follow the movie. Who knew a dramatic mystery picture wouldn't be a Michael Bay type movie?

I really enjoyed Tinker Sailor Soldier Spy and that's quite slow and wordy compared to most modern box office successes. I also enjoy british drama like Sherlock, which requires 100x more attention if you want to follow every detail.

There is nothing complicated about dragon tattoo, and nothing that requires a ton of attention.

[eucatastrophe]

There is nothing complicated about dragon tattoo, and nothing that requires a ton of attention.

And despite all that, you still manage to completely miss the point of the film.
Is that sad or what?

[Neeshka]

And despite all that, you still manage to completely miss the point of the film.

Which is ?

[vindicatorx]

I really enjoyed Tinker Sailor Soldier Spy and that's quite slow and wordy compared to most modern box office successes. I also enjoy british drama like Sherlock, which requires 100x more attention if you want to follow every detail.

There is nothing complicated about dragon tattoo, and nothing that requires a ton of attention.

I like how you deflected, I haven't seen Tinker but as Gary Oldman is in it and I generally like the pictures he is in I'm sure I will probably enjoy it as well. I fail to see what British Drama or Sherlock I assume you are referring to the newer movies which are nothing like the actual books. Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is one of the better films I have seen in the last oh decade, perhaps I was able to follow it better because I was already familiar with the story.

[Shrouded]

Nope, LoTR is a relatively simple and tight narrative. The subplots are always subplots and don't really take over everything else. Also LoTR, the book is a classic; a masterpiece, a defining work in science fiction and will be remembered in literary history forever pretty much. It's unfair to compare it to pulp fiction/airport reading type novels imo.

LoTR is about the adventure of a small inconsequential person in a huge fantasy world; his quest to destroy a ring and in the process defeat a very great evil. Sauron is the main antagonist behind every bad thing in middle earth; he's quite important in fellowship. Nowhere near a minor character.

I think you missed my point - I wasn't saying that Sauron is a minor character. I was saying that his appearance in the first movie sets the stage for what comes later. Lisbeth isn't a minor character, as will be apparent in the upcoming movies.

[Neeshka]

I fail to see what British Drama or Sherlock I assume you are referring to the newer movies which are nothing like the actual books. Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is one of the better films I have seen in the last oh decade, perhaps I was able to follow it better because I was already familiar with the story.

Sherlock is a British TV series; or more like a telefilm or movie short (each episode is an hour and a half). It's a modern reinterpretation of Sherlock Holmes and very widely acclaimed. The new 2nd sherlock holmes movie by guy ritchie is basically an action film/james bond in a victorian setting having little to do with the original books in spirit or style.

Tinker is not good "just because gary oldman is in it". Of course he's an excellent actor in the film; but there are lots of other good things about the film too. TTSS is ALSO based on a book; and most people haven't read it. But it's an excellent movie on it's own. You don't have to read the book at all to appreciate the movie.

I'm not "deflecting" at all. Someone suggested that thinking movies or movies with a lot of words are probably not for me; so I just presented some movies like that which i enjoyed.

---------- Post added 2012-01-28 at 12:57 AM ----------

I think you missed my point - I wasn't saying that Sauron is a minor character. I was saying that his appearance in the first movie sets the stage for what comes later. Lisbeth isn't a minor character, as will be apparent in the upcoming movies.

Setting the stage is one thing, but having a minor character completely eclipse most of the main plot is another. The movie doesn't even end with a hook that suggests a next movie. It's very different from LoTR where it's one book split into 3 parts. Millenium is 3 books, which can be read standalone; it's not like the foundation trilogy or lotr. A more apt comparison would be LoTR and Hobbit.

---------- Post added 2012-01-28 at 01:08 AM ----------

Another thing; the cat scene troubled me.
Why was it added into the movie ? Why is killing cats/kittens something all of these smug directors do (drag me to hell had this too, hated it) ?
Why does blomkvist react is such an unnatural way to the cat being killed ?
Why does lizbeth take pictures of the dead cat ?

[Shrouded]

Setting the stage is one thing, but having a minor character completely eclipse most of the main plot is another. The movie doesn't even end with a hook that suggests a next movie. It's very different from LoTR where it's one book split into 3 parts. Millenium is 3 books, which can be read standalone; it's not like the foundation trilogy or lotr. A more apt comparison would be LoTR and Hobbit.

I'm not sure what to say. You've been told that Lizbeth is the protagonist of the trilogy, yet you continue to insist that she is a minor character. There isn't really much more I can say.

[shiftbull]

I don't read the book, I watched the original movie (Sweden) and was very good, the best thriller movie I see last year by far, actors, direction, etc. The plot, is good, by your comments im guessing the Hollywood remake is a peace of shit... ho wow, i dont se that comming ...

---------- Post added 2012-01-28 at 01:36 AM ----------

I haven't seen the American version yet, but I loved the Swedish version. A bit "slow," yes, but for me it made the powerful scenes even more intense. And I thought Noomi Rapace's performance was excellent.

^^^this
Also the male actor -Nyqvist- was fantastic, slow peaced yes, but the last scenes where absolute adrenaline, good direction.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1132620/

[Neeshka]

I'm not sure what to say. You've been told that Lizbeth is the protagonist of the trilogy, yet you continue to insist that she is a minor character. There isn't really much more I can say.

No I understand she is the protagonist in the subsequent books; that's obvious. But she isn't in the 1st book and isn't in the movie.
Think about it this way - if neville longbottom in harry potter had a very lengthy exposition in the 1st book; or if in the hobbit book there was an extremely lengthy and detailed chapter about aragorn or saruman.

[Badpaladin]

No I understand she is the protagonist in the subsequent books; that's obvious. But she isn't in the 1st book and isn't in the movie.

She's really more of a second main character than a minor character. As far as the "point" of the movie, there isn't one -- and it's certainly not meant to make you come out feeling good about anything. It's not fundamentally an American film, which I think is what bothers you. Different strokes for different folks.

[Neeshka]

She's really more of a second main character than a minor character. As far as the "point" of the movie, there isn't one -- and it's certainly not meant to make you come out feeling good about anything. It's not fundamentally an American film, which I think is what bothers you. Different strokes for different folks.

Yeah I agree. I feel that she gets a lot more importance in the books than the movie. In the movie she just seems like a weirdo/nerdy/goth assistant that helps with the case. Perhaps it isn't an american film but it's not anything like typical british films either. Maybe you're right.

I probably should give the books another chance; maybe a lot of the charm is lost in translation though.

---------- Post added 2012-01-28 at 03:02 AM ----------

So I watched some of the movie again, I have some questions:

1) What's the deal with the whole cat thing ? why does lizbeth take photos of the dead cat ?
2) Why is there so much detail and interviews with members of the vanger family ?
3) What was the libel case about ? we're never told in the movie
4) Which part of the movie suggests the need for a sequel, or that the story is unfinished ?
5) Lizbeth, at the start of the movie talks to some computer nerd and then there's a scene where she's fiddling around with supply lines ? what's going on ? what are these scenes for ?

Even after reading the plot in detail on wikipedia; I still feel completely lost during the 1st 40 minutes of the film.

[Lefthandpath]

one thing i will NEVER understand:

1. person reads book and or comic book
2. person loves story
3. movie comes out based on book
4. PERSON IS STUPID ENOUGH TO THINK MOVIE WILL BE ANYTHING LIKE BOOK
5. person goes to see movie
6. person is disappointed with movie

stop going to see movies based on your favorite book/comic book. they will NEVER EVER EVER live up to your expectations. never ever. ever.

i hate reading, so i dig a lot of the movies i see. i get my monies worth, bookworms get a kick in the no-no spot.

whose "winning?"

this guy.

[Woltereck]

I watched the Swedish made films and honestly the first one was quite, weird, but watching the two sequels made the first movie make a hell of a lot more sense and good.

I liked the English version of Dragon Tattoo, I just hope they also do the two sequels. I prefer the Swedish ones though, Noomi Rapace did an amazing job as Lisbeth.

[Fojos]

Probably the most overrated book/movie this century so far (doesn't help that I'm Swedish with people here hyping it like mad). Annoying Mary Sue characters.

[Neeshka]

I finally got my hands on the 1st book. I ask anyone to read through the first 10 pages and tell me how it feels. Personally I've never seen such a ridiculously boring intro to a book, EVER.

It's very clear early on that stieg larson is obsessive about unnecessary details that add nothing to the overall story, characters are introduced abruptly without any backstory or explanation, and the writing suddenly devolves into flashbacks/side-stories that are totally irrelevant and break the flow of the narrative. As a reader you are instantly barraged with proper nouns that aren't explained at all - names/place names (hard to tell the difference it's in swedish), locations, past events, and details about people.

Page 1-4 - old guy and policeman talking, suddenly start talking about pressed flowers; excruciatingly detailed botanical info about flowers
Page 5 - vangar family tree
Page 6 - trial of blomvkist; then suddenly spins off to some burglary in the past

ok lost interest already.

It's almost as if the writer doesn't want people to continue reading.... how does someone start a book so horribly boring ?