Pajiba

Didn't like the original myself. Felt besides the gratuitous for the sake of it moments, it was a rather by the numbers and forgetful thriller. So will probably pass on the remake. I've only ever liked about two Fincher flicks as it is. Nothing I'd ever own though.

Ummmmmmm. Where do you get that David Fincher is gay, haha? He was married, has a child, and is currently dating a woman.

Even if that was the case what does him being gay have to do with whether or not he could direct this movie? Are you trying to say that gay people should only direct films that deal with homosexuality? Are you saying a gay person can't explain a heterosexual relationship? That a gay man can't direct a film about misogyny?

Fincher is a great director with an awesome track record when it comes to films with dark tones and themes.

The sexual exploitation of the female lead? I've gotten in this argument before. Have you read the books? Lisbeth is a sexual person. She has sex with whomever she pleases, male or female, and does so quite often in the books. Many of the main and side characters in the books are attracted to her. She's also not a stranger to nudity in the stories. How can you not sexually exploit a character who is sexually exploited in the books?

Craig is the lead? Of course...Blomkvist is the main lead of the first book. If you were to look at it as screen time Blomkvist would be on screen about 60% of the time to Lisbeth's 40%.

I really am looking forward to the remake. I just can't imagine someone out performing Noomi Rapace in that role. I'm sure Rooney Mara will be fine, but I ain't picturing that raw energy during the...unfortunate plot points.

Based on basically everything I've heard people saying about the first movie, no one will agree with me, but I though Noomi Rapace was an incredibly shitty Lisbeth Salander.

To me, her Salander came of as a ball of petty childish angst as opposed to someone who was genuinely volatile and damaged. She also looked nothing like how I pictured the character. Rapace looked physically tough and imposing to me, whereas the Salander of the books was described as almost anorexically thin and frail. She has an incredible toughness in her, yes, but it is more the fragile toughness of a broken bottle. I don't think Rapace captured that.

I read the book before looking into the cast of either movie, and I basically pictured Rooney Mara. When I finally got a look at Rapace, I was completely surprised at how much people seemed to like her in the role.

On another note, people need to quit complaining about this as if it's a straight-up remake of an original movie. I'm sure Fincher based his movie on the book and not the other film. They are two separate adaptations, not one movie remaking another.

I'll agree with you Pfft. While I liked Rapace I didn't think she fit my image/impression of Salander either.

I'm genuinely surprised at the passion for this issue. I admit that i haven't read the entire trilogy, but I didn't feel like I learned that much about contemporary Sweden from the first book... Aside from the statistics about violence against women, it just felt like a mystery that could have unfolded anywhere.

I acknowledge my own ignorance on this, however. Perhaps that is the main reason why I'm looking forward to Fincher's version. Try to think of it as a way for more people to connect to the book and not an affront to Swedish culture.

@Pfft: You wrote: "On another note, people need to quit complaining about this as if it's a straight-up remake of an original movie. I'm sure Fincher based his movie on the book and not the other film. They are two separate adaptations, not one movie remaking another."

Sadly, you're wrong. A lot of the shots in the trailer are exact copies off of shots of the original adaption.

6) They cared enough to make the best trailer ever.

From what I heard, in Fincher's version they're talking English but in Swedish accents. I might be mistaken as I'm at work and can't watch the trailer, but if is the case then FUCK IT. Why not just relocate it? They're apparently changing the ending anyway so why not actually do a totally different version rather than one that just feels so familiar already. I don't hate all remakes but this one feels too similar and too freaking soon. I saw it in cinemas LAST YEAR.

i like how ppl seem to forget dat some of us didn't read the books and enjoyed the hell out of the original movie.

so please stop dissing the original and be happy dat you'll be getting the book version you've been waiting for.

and i was going to ignore it like i did with Let Me In but dat poster has piqued my interest quite a bit. What is Fincher thinking?

Daniel Craig is not pretty and in certain lighting and angles, looks haggard and kind of fug. I remember when he was chosen for Bond and seeing his photo for the first time and thinking he was butt ugly, as a matter of fact. Michael Nyqvist might not be Hollywood handsome but he certainly isn't an unattractive man. Basing Craig's superiority in this role on appearance is bullshit anyway.

I'd agree with most of your comments when talking about the second two movies in the Swedish trilogy, but the first movie of the Swedish version was an amazingly taut thriller -- I thought near perfect. That movie haunted me for weeks. It hard to see anything competing with that.

I just think it's unnecessary, but that's because I enjoyed the original series of films, and I fail to see any significant changes in Fincher's version, at least from the trailer.

And yes, I say "original" because as was mentioned in a previous comment, a lot of those shots in the trailer above are near-perfect replicas of shots from the Swedish version.

So Rapace was bad in the film because she didn't look like the character you imagined from the middling novels? How is that her fault and a reflection of her performance?
Posted by: Robert at August 28, 2011 9:39 PM

I know you're probably not directly referring this question to me, but I'll answer it. I thought she did well in her performance, and she was generally engaging. However, the character in the book is supposed to look weak, she's supposed to be mistaken for someone a lot younger than she actually is, she's physically tiny. It counteracts the fact that she has no problem getting revenge or holding her own. It's an important factor in the book. To have someone that didn't hold this image changed the character dramatically.

Of course, we all know that films rarely stick to their source material. Especially when it comes to the characters.

As for the difference between Craig and Nyqvist. Blomkvist is supposed to be attractive (and despite some criticism to the contrary many people find Craig as such). He's also supposed to be athletic. We know Craig can pull that aspect off...Nyqvist...not so much.

jaf's opinion might've held some water with me if it didn't look and sound like he had run the reply through Babelfish before posting.

I have no opinion on this whatsoever, as I haven't read any of the books. But I'm hesitant to use that score as a point of recommendation. It may be just me, but I thought The Social Network's score was boring and unremarkable. I

After reading some of these reactions, I'm getting the idea that some the fanbase (not all, relax) acts like the Twilight crowd...add 5 years or so.

Relax, as it was stated earlier, it's not like it's high literature. And if anyone takes a swipe against Reznor again, I will eviscerate you with my 10th halo.

@Case Well said.

I saw the Swedish version and it was brilliant. Noomi Rapace's acting is believable and not distracting and so is the way she looks. Rooney Mara in this costume looks forced. She looks like she's trying to be this dark goth girl and not really is one, where as Noomi Rapace seems so natural with it.

If I saw Rooney Mara walking down the street wearing this costume I'd be looking for the film crew where this movie was shooting. Rooney Mara looks like she's playing dress up.

Also, this movie did not need to be redone. David Fincher could have used this time to do another dark, fresh movie but instead he is doing something that has already been done. All these celebrities won't necessarily make the movie better.

@Nash, I can't criticize what you said, since it's an opinion. It's funny, though. If you reversed the names of the actresses in your comment, you would have my sentiments exactly. I feel like Rapace looks forced and Mara looks natural.

@Pfft, the problem is that Rooney Mara looks in real life like the proverbial girl next door, while Noomi Rapace has always had a hard cast to her looks.

Rooney Mara is just too cutting edge for you. Perhaps you prefer that your counterculture cyber-queens conform to your own preconceived notion of what one should look like. Call me a douche if you like, but Noomi Rapace's look is dated. Drugged out prostitute crack addict is the new ass-kicking cyberpunk.

Most of that was tongue in cheek, so don't bother with the smug rebuttal. I'm just feckin' around.

I believe that the original title was "Women Who Hate Men that Hate Women" or something like that. The books are actually about defending women from being exploited. (*spoiler*)Revenge for a battered mother, the sex trade, and murder.