I watched it today, and it was actually better than I thought XD but the actors were so-so. Rooney mara is too pretty to be playing lisbeth salander. and there is to much romance in my opinion. anyways. what do you think?
Posted by charlotte in nowhere , 25 December 2011
18 comments on “american movie”
As beautiful as Rooney Mara is, I felt she both physically and mentally aced the role. Also, Craig didn’t get much of a chance to act because he had 3 trillion lines to speak in too short a time frame. I definitely feel it was better than the Swedish movies.
Posted by Usmovers_02 in Goffstown NH ,
I THINK CRAIG REDEEMED HIM SELF SOME WHAT BECAUSE ATAS JAMES BOND HE WAS TERRIBLE,, BUT ROONEY MARA TOLE THE MOVIE AWAY FROM EVERYONE. IT WAS GREAT!
Posted by MOVIE MAN in MAITLAND, FL ,
The energy, the dynamics, the drive, the cinematography of the American movie far supersede those of the Swedish one. Fincher’s Blomkvist and Berger are so much better than their Swedish counterparts! The only Swedish actor that wins (by a very narrow margin) is Rapace, but Mara has performed admirably. Go see it NOW!
Posted by Orion ,
What the hell, Craig was the best James Bond since Sean Connery….brought realism and humanity to the role…that aside, Rooney Mara was perfect, not too pretty, just right, and like Orion said, Berger and Blomkvist much better casting in Hollywood version, better all around than Swedish version.
Posted by Barnyard in Cincinnati ,
The Swedish movie is still the best, in every way. The Hollywood version does not describe/show the nordic way of living convicingly.
Posted by Leena in Helsinki ,
Finchers “Girl With The Dragon Tattoo”: Well made, cleaving more closely to the book–great performance actually by Daniel Craig (although I miss the revolutionary days of Hollywood in the early ’70's when not all parts were played by ‘pretty’ people, and like in the Swedish version were played by normal looking, talented actors); Rooney Mara looks great and gives a much more subdued performance than Noomi (who will always be MY Lisbeth); Filmaking more sophisticated (bigger budget obviously) and I also felt that they went soft and pulled a few punches where the Swedish version met them head on. The opening title ‘sequence’ bugged me–not sure why, but why did they need it? Overall, though, Thumbs Up.
Posted by soloranger33 in Chicago, IL ,
I vote for the Swedish version. The American version just copied the original.
We liked the original Swedish version better. Don’t understand why the Americans thought they could do it better. The Swedish version did the heavy lifting. The American version just copied the original. (We are Americans who are fed up with the lousy movies that come from Hollywood and much prefer foreign and indie movies.)
Posted by Zoegirl in Knoxville, TN ,
I thought the american version was great.
Posted by Mbz1 ,
American Tattoo – Lisbeth New – A Bottom Line Review
WARNING – mild spoilers in secondary things.
The US version was very good, and Rooney was very,very good and unexpectedly spot on.
But for all its Style it fell a tiny bit short of the 1st Swedish film. Why>
#1.) The profound importance of the 3 “trophy walls” – flowers at opening bracket, missing girls in middle,(pivot,) and horror wall at end bracket was gone. The skeleton of the movie was gone. Just harshly lovely surfaces remained.
#2.) To my horror, instead of a believable and deeply moving quite moment of summing up after the horror in the basement in which the male and female leads agreed to be 2 different people – in this film PERMISSION is given for one by the other before the action – jettisoning the contrast of moral worlds that Michael and Lisbeth lived in. WRONG!
#3.) The second film is weakened by Lisbeth playing chess IN THIS FILM with her old guardian – this mitigates her string of confrontations with her own heartless way of dealing with people that made a spine in the second book.
Other things were much better. His female editor was not a pussy who couldn’t run a magazine like in the original film. This editor ROCKED. The family was better explored here. Hateful bunch. And the resolution was a little smoother and faster – more logical in context, and not so much like an afterthought from left field.
All in all – Noomi Rapace looked physically wrong (always seemed “too grown up”), but had a violence and feral danger Rooney lacks – Rooney, yet richly deserves recognition for her acting. She was a more BELIEVABLE Lisbeth – if more frail.
First “Dragon Tattoo” A (with an A for levitating 3 films to World Stardom on her shoulders – to Rooney) – More truthful pace and framing
US “Dragon Tattoo” A – (with an A for unexpected and crackling accomplishment to Rooney)
Posted by Leo Rivers in Cottage Grove OR ,
Just came from the movies: I ‘had’ to see the American version of TGWTDT on the first day – the first available show…
Not dissapointed, no: just wondering: so many things are OK, yet then again there is so much missing, like:
- I suppose it’s a ‘rated’ movie (here in Slovenia it doesn’t come to anything as big & small children are wondering around the multiplex with free access to any hall), yet since there remained the rape scenes – you would think it is rated somehow: so how come everybody is ‘smoking like Turks’ all the time?
- the above is just an illustration: here is what I missed the most, compared to the Swedish movie and the book: Lisbeth is not the supreme hacker, as you expect her to be – if you don’t know the background (i.e. from the book) – she doesn’t do all the great stuff on the computer – all is more or less circumstantial…
Also, Craig may not be the best Blomkvist: mind me, Nykvist is also far from the mark, but somehow more journalist type, laid back, bohemic. Craig seems kind of tense.
Mara is quite good. But she doesn’t strike me as a mental case. She copies Rapace to a certain degree: pay attention how she walks and moves. Also, there is some tenderness in her (Mara), that is out of place, as well as the ‘chatty tendencies’. Salander from the books is, among other things, a lunatic fighter in every situation, even with 0% odds. These girls are actresses, one somewhat better than another, per situation.
Plummer is also inferior to the Swedish H. Vanger: there is no passion to his quest – you hardly believe that he’s been engaged in this project for 40 years, that the business empire went down because of it etc.
However, I like the American movie, as strange as this may seem. I also like the Swedish first movie.
I think now I’ll fire up the DVD and see the original again, to compare some more notes…
Posted by Duško Milic in Ljubljana ,
Read the book, see the Swedish trilogy, and skip the US version (from an American)!
Posted by thiawroane in Allentown, PA ,
Is that american film telling story as first book or whole trilogy? Pls replay couse i dont know if i should read just one or three books before watching?
Posted by bb ,
I think you should read the first two before you see the movie
Posted by CZ in San Luis, AZ ,
I did see the three books and loved them.
Posted by charlotte in nowhere ,
bb: no, it only tells the story of the first book.
bb: no, it only tells the story of the first book.
The American version was the best! The Swedish movie was more like a mini series of Law and Order. Great cast, love seeing Daniel Craig (James Bond) playing the female lead. Running when shot at, whining when he gets his stitches and being lured into Martin’ lair. I liked when Martin said you are the first male to be here. Rooney is Lisbeth, her body, her angular face, her subduedness (keeping everything inside). Noomi was excellent but she was too pretty and looked like a boy; but her performance was excellent. The supporting cast of Plummer, Skarcgard (sorry for butchering his name) and Wright were far superior to their Swedish counteparts. The cimenatogarphy was gorgeous; I felt the cold, lonely desolate island. I hope Sony will kept Fincher as director unlike what happened in the Swedish movies. I think Larsson would of approved of this cast and movie.
Posted by sonya in new britain ,