.
Last edited:
David Fincher's THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO
- Thread starter Rowdy Roddy McDowall
- Start date
I enjoyed it very much. Mrs. Mara was wonderful as Lisbeth. Also enjoyed Reznor & Ross' score.
The scene where Mikael was suspended and suffocated was one of the eeriest I have seen in a while.
The sounds of him fighting to breath through the shopping bag were intense. I can see why Craig passed out while filming.
The sounds of him fighting to breath through the shopping bag were intense. I can see why Craig passed out while filming.
I'm referring to the revenge rape scene. It's beautiful and awesome.
Oddly enough the date was the beginning to the end of that relationship, so I can't watch the movie that much.
I've never seen the Swedish version, nor have I read the novel, so just judging it as a film on its own merits, I thought it was excellent. A little long and disjointed, but well-acted, beautifully filmed, and the music was fantastic. I don't think it was quite as good as Reznor & Ross' work on The Social Network, but it was good. Sadly, last I heard the sequels seem to be stuck in development hell.
I don't think the sequels were ever really considered, there has been talk about the sequels since about a week after the first movie came out to a disappointed start. There was a great article, maybe on IGN.com that explained why the sequels will never get made, it's pretty much they are just boring.
(I wouldn't know, I haven't read the books.)
PROMETHEUS' Noomi Rapace played Lisbeth Salander in the original film
I've read all three books. Couldn't put them down, they were that engrossing. The Fincher film was, I thought, a suitable adaptation. I'm much more interested in seeing the potential sequels though, as I prefer The Girl Who Played With Fire and The Girl Who Kicked The Hornet's Nest to the first book.
Fincher's movie was my introduction to the series, and I quite liked it. That said, the chase at the end was kind of weak - IIRC, Lisbeth was following Dr. Selvig so closely on her motorcycle that the could easily have killed her simply by slamming on his brakes, so the fact that he (a very smart dude) didn't do so yanked me out of the sequence. Also, just where was he going? Even if he had some emergency stash of cash somewhere, and a passport in his glove compartment, I doubt he could plausibly have escaped to some third-world tropical retirement once Craig and Lisbeth phone the local police, and he could certainly never go home.
Also, once we got to the twist that the missing woman was still alive, I was all, "wait, why did the old woman never think that was a possibility?" And couldn't the missing woman have smuggled a note into one of those bird prints? Maybe even a super-secure email address?
Also, once we got to the twist that the missing woman was still alive, I was all, "wait, why did the old woman never think that was a possibility?" And couldn't the missing woman have smuggled a note into one of those bird prints? Maybe even a super-secure email address?
IIRC
Harriet and Anita switch identities later in life.
Since she never returns home, and they looked very much alike, the family was none the wiser.
Why would she risk letting anyone know she was alive?
Since she never returns home, and they looked very much alike, the family was none the wiser.
Why would she risk letting anyone know she was alive?
^ Like the OP said, spoilers are fine. The movie is several years old, and the book even older. According to board rules, you click on a thread about a years-old movie, you do so at your peril.
As for "Why would she risk letting anyone know she was alive?" Um... that was the whole point of her sending the yearly flower prints to Henrik (Christopher Plummer). It was intended to be a comforting gesture, since she'd done it before her disappearance, and Henrik assumed it was the murderer tormenting him, apparently never guessing the actual intention at play.
As for "Why would she risk letting anyone know she was alive?" Um... that was the whole point of her sending the yearly flower prints to Henrik (Christopher Plummer). It was intended to be a comforting gesture, since she'd done it before her disappearance, and Henrik assumed it was the murderer tormenting him, apparently never guessing the actual intention at play.
The movie was pretty crappy compared to the original trilogy. And they are not even making the sequels. So it's a very, very, very pointless remake.
This article on the subject from two days ago would seem to disagree with your assessment that they're "not even making the sequels."
http://www.kdramastars.com/articles/81388/20150411/the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-movie-sequel.htm
It's been problematic getting sequel films started, yes. But all signs point to Sony still making them.
Other pertinent links, covering the back-and-forth on the matter:
http://www.christianpost.com/news/will-the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-get-a-sequel-137260/
http://www.cheatsheet.com/entertain...attoo-book-may-restart-movies.html/?a=viewall
http://www.nme.com/filmandtv/news/-the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-sequel-could-cove/375497
Basically, it sounds like the release of book #4 might just jumpstart the production, and it would appear Sony is considering merging "...Played with Fire" and "...Kicked the Hornet's Nest" into one intermediate film, and capping off the trilogy with the final, fourth book adaptation.
Recasting one of the main characters in doing so?
It just doesn't make it less pointless.
Had they recast Kirk and/or Spock in Star Trek Into Darkness, the whole Abramstrek reboot would have been really pointless as well.
