The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

In the words of Darth Vader, "Nooooooooo!" Nah, I still regard Peter as one of the great ones and I respect his opinion because I know his words aren't just to draw traffic to the Rolling Stone site for money as other "critics" do. I read his review and I have to say that I still plan on watching this film, and I'll draw my own conclusion.

Dec 22 - 11:29 AM

Muneeb Afzal

do not go with this view as ths does't make any sense, this movie is awesome trust me

Dec 24 - 12:32 PM

Dre M.

Conclusion drawn...I loved it! I tend to agree with some of his points, particularly how the film never quite reached that level of epicness, but it was certainly close and it was definitely worth watching.

Jan 2 - 04:48 PM

Chris Erdman

Least he isn't biased

Dec 22 - 08:53 PM

Joey Spivey

Not sure what the hell Travers is talking about. This movie crackles with energy and excitement. Much better than the 2009 Swedish version. And Rooney Mara is friggin' awesome. Perfect combination of fragile and insane.

Dec 22 - 10:09 PM

M. S.

No it doesn't. It's much worse than the 2009 Swedish version. And Rooney Mara fucking sucks.

Jan 26 - 10:39 AM

Anthony Burke

she sucks?? people like you poison this site. Would you have preferred a blonde with a big chest??

Feb 5 - 05:29 PM

Stephen Dias

Shouldn't you be back on 4chan spamming your hate in /v/?

Mar 25 - 11:10 PM

Taylor Born

Rooney Mara is more like the character in the book and Fincher's is much closer adaption. Not that the Swedish one is bad

May 6 - 06:31 PM

Tess Fiant

Couldn't agree with you more. To be honest, I don't know how Travers can coin this "impersonal". At the end of the movie, I was rather exhausted from how much emotion it drew out of me.

Jul 8 - 01:54 AM

Adam Herman

Yeah, atleast his review doesn't bitch the whole time that there was a Swedish version already.

Dec 22 - 10:10 PM

Michael Both

But it should.

Jan 5 - 05:18 PM

Jacob Burns

Still, 2.5/4 is positive.

Dec 23 - 08:31 AM

Tomek Andraka

2.5/4

Dec 25 - 08:33 AM

Michael Patison

I just saw this and boy was it wonderful. I disagree with him, but at least he gives concrete, credible reasons. I personally thought that the film was quite daring without being too daring. In other words, I thought certain scenes that could have been grotesquely filmed were filmed incredibly well so as to make the viewer feel uneasy without being revolting. Those scenes in particular are the ones that I felt pulled me into the harsh realities of the characters and made it personal.

Dec 23 - 08:22 PM

Gabriele Cookstown

"Rape" is so wonderful...WTH are u talking about ...it's disturbing

Jan 18 - 09:16 AM

David Seelen

I agree with Travers. Fincher plays it to safe, and Travers is unbaised having reviewed previous works of Finchers like Fight Club so favorably "Pulls you in, challenges your prejudices, rocks your world and leaves you laughing in the face of an abyss. It's alive, all right. It's also an uncompromising American classic." This could not be said of Dragon Tattoo albeit the material sails in from overseas!

Dec 23 - 11:18 PM

Phillips Choe

Isn't this considered positive?

Dec 24 - 10:04 PM

Aaron Greenwood

Noomi Rapace loved and respected the character of Lisbeth Salander, Rooney Mara tried but did not understand the depth of Salander's character. The Rapace interpretation was robust, Mara was flat. Rapace as Lisbeth was compelling, you cheered her on, Mara as Lizbeth was repulsive. What Mara didn't understand was that Lisbeth is a feminist who rather than cooperate with a corrupt system acted outside the law with justice. She took her blows and gave them back with interest. She is a warrior, one to be feared. Rapace understood this, Mara did not. Rapace played the character with love, Mara did not.

Most of the angst by Mara's fanboys is in the form of nasty criticisms like calling the Sweedish version made for TV, well so what, it is far better than this movie with all its flash and money.

Dec 25 - 06:54 AM

Andrew StClair

Rooney Mara loved and respected the character of Lisbeth Salander, Noomi Rapace tried but did not understand the depth of Salander's character. The Mara interpretation was robust, Rapace was flat. Mara as Lisbeth was compelling, you cheered her on, Rapace as Lizbeth was repulsive. What Rapace didn't understand was that Lisbeth is a feminist who rather than cooperate with a corrupt system acted outside the law with justice. She took her blows and gave them back with interest. She is a warrior, one to be feared. Mara understood this, Rapace did not. Mara played the character with love, Rapace did not.

Dec 25 - 05:55 PM

Hunter Linn

Most of the angst by Rapace's fanboys is in the form of nasty criticisms like calling the American version made of flash and money, well so what, it is far better than the Swedish movie with all its made for TV sensibilities.

Dec 27 - 12:12 PM

Aaron Greenwood

The thing with Rooney Mara is she has no body of work other than praise for ONE scene in The Social Network. She is a creation of the entertainment media. With the level of marketing for his movie and endless fluff in the press featuring Rooney Mara you would expect a better preforming movie not one that is tanking. Sony has stopped reporting box office two days ago, what does that tell you.

So mock me fanboy, that is fine if that is all you have to offer.

Dec 30 - 02:43 PM

Braden Schlueter

"The thing with Rooney Mara is she has no body of work other than praise for ONE scene in The Social Network. She is a creation of the entertainment media."

I feel like that statement doesn't even make sense. What exactly is a creation of the entertainment media? Isn't that basically what every famous actor/actress is anyway?

I think that a large reason it is tanking is that no one wants to see a film like this during the holiday season. There was a large gap before this when there were very few compelling, high quality movies being released. IF this were released earlier it perhaps would be doing better. Unfortunately it was released during a flurry of high budget popcorn/holiday/action flicks that are raking in the cash and are better suited for the holiday season. I don't think it is fair to say that the hype behind Mara's performance alone should have put this on top of the box-office earnings during its release, thus it should also not serve as a black mark on her performance.

Dec 31 - 10:37 PM

Dylan Sigaty-Hawkes

UMAD?

Jan 1 - 01:30 PM

Michael Both

Andrew TROLL

Jan 5 - 05:20 PM

David Priest

More just pointing out the lack of substance in the previous comments...

May 23 - 02:46 PM

C W

"Rapace as Lisbeth was compelling, you cheered her on, Mara as Lizbeth was repulsive."

The thing is, Lisbeth is supposed to be repulsive- at least, that's certainly how she came across in the book. That's what makes her such an interesting character- there are plenty of reasons not to like her, but she's fascinating anyway.

Many of the other issues you seem to have with Mara are actually problems with the writing, directing or editing. Given the script, she did an excellent job of portraying the character. For example, I'm not sure what exactly you think she could have done to make the character appear more feminist while still saying the same lines, wearing the same clothes, doing the same things, etc.

Dec 29 - 09:38 PM

Aaron Greenwood

Your wrong, you don't understand Lisbeth's character, she is crime fighter of sorts, she dispenses justice, she is intelligent, creative and lives outside the law. Rapace was keenly aware of that is why we like her Lisbeth. We cheer her on when she settles scores that the complacent society outside her ignores. She is a hero.

Making her repulsive show Rooney Mara doesn't have a clue. I should cut her a break she only did what she was told.

Dec 30 - 02:48 PM

Addyson Medley

Read the book, Aaron. You don't know what you're talking about.

Jan 1 - 12:32 AM

Bigbrother .

How does Mara not do that again? I thought the avenger angle came across very well and powerfully from Mara's performance. The scene where Craig tells her he wants her help to find a killer of women was amazing. The look she gives him is going to be one of those moments in film that lives forever like Christopher Reeve opening his shirt to the Superman S, Julie Andrews twirling thru the Alps or Al Pacino's face as the doors are closed in The Godfather.

Jan 3 - 10:22 AM

Kevin Morris

Aaron, from you're posts, you're the most self-serving, arrogant, disillusion, pseudo-intellectual there has ever been.

Mar 24 - 06:33 AM

Kevin Morris

If the American version came out first, you'd be saying the exact opposite, I can guarantee that. You're opinions are completely and utterly convoluted by the unrequited respect you pine for from your peers.

Mar 24 - 06:36 AM

Vadim Voroshilov

Kevin M, grow up please.

Jun 14 - 05:59 PM

Laura Whitley

Wow... After reading all the comments I'll say this. Maybe Mara isn't a terrible actress, but whoever wrote her lines did not get Salander. They softened her up to please the American audience. Lisbeth Salander would never, and in fact never asked permission to Kill anyone, as Mara did in this horrible rendition of TGWTDT. Lisbeth never told anyone about her past. Mikael had to investigate that himself. She found the links to all the mysteries that this film portrays Mikael as finding. Go back and read the books then watch both films objectively. I don't give a crap who Mara is, I had no opinion of her before this movie and have no better opinion of her now. Noomi, she made me like her character, and for that I like her as an actress.

Nov 3 - 11:39 PM

Dan OConnell

Flash?? what movie did you watch..

Dec 25 - 04:34 PM

Sharon Greenberg

Not a faithful adaptation. You did not read the book obviously.

Dec 26 - 12:25 PM

Rich M.

He may have meant faithful to the spirit and tone of the book rather than the actual content. I haven't actually read the book, so I honestly don't know, but it's a thought

Dec 29 - 08:24 PM

Laura Whitley

I would recommend reading the book, because he seriously deviated in the ending story line of Harriet and Anita. It was very upsetting especially since it bears relevance to the future two books.

Nov 3 - 11:41 PM

Niel Rishoi

Sour grapes, Travers. You bitched about the forthcoming Hollywood version in advance, and...you wanted to be right. You're wrong. Fincher's version is more cinematic, darker, Rooney Mara better, more involved and charmismatic than Noomi Rapace by far. You just didn't want to be wrong.

Jan 2 - 11:20 PM

Randy Shick

You are exactly right Niel, I thought this would happen, Travers talked crap about the remake before it got released.

So he had to turn on his boy Fincher to make himself look right, he just couldn't admit the film was good.

I'm not saying he doesn't have a right to his opinion, but this is highly suspicious.

Jan 6 - 11:43 AM

Laura Whitley

Niel, I disagree about Mara, yes she was more charismatic, but that isn't what Salander's character is. She is in no way charismatic and to portray her as such is sad. She is hard and tough and doesn't have to ask if she can kill someone. (Which the writers had Mara do.) Lisbeth was very poorly portrayed in this movie version of the book.

Nov 3 - 11:44 PM

Steven Scott

It was not Fincher's best movie, nor was it as good as the foreign one, but he still did a good job at directing it.

Jan 4 - 10:57 AM

Graeme Higginson

I can't say that I disagree.

Jan 4 - 04:21 PM

Darren Beason

You're like any other opinion. Nothing special and easily forgettable. And.. you know what they say about opinions, they're just like --- and everyone's got one. Except yours is terrible.

Jan 5 - 09:58 AM

Vadim Voroshilov

Just like your opinion of his opinion?

Jun 14 - 06:05 PM

Ida Andersson

Noomi Rapace is, and will always be Lisbeth Salander. After having read the books, seen the three swedish movies and now having seen the "hollywood version" I can honestly say that Rooney Mara did not portray Lisbeth Salander as I would have hoped. There is a lack of depth. What Rooney forgets is Lisbeth's childhood. She is not a heartless hacker, she has a very sensitive and emotional side, something which is not at all shown in Fincher's version.

If you ask me, the Fincher version was almost unnecessary as it was basically just a translation of the swedish movie with better known actors. Maybe I am saying this because I am Swedish but I had very high expectations before watching this movie. Lisbeth Salander is the new Pippi Longstocking in my eyes and Rooney Mara does not achieve that.

Jan 8 - 12:35 AM

Randy Shick

Everything you just said is so off, Mara showed the sensitive side that Rapice didn't show in her very brutal performance.

Also, this movie is so differen't from the Swedish film in dozens of ways that it's not just a simple English translation.

The entire final act is almost entirely differen't from the Swedish film, it's sounds like you are a little biased when it comes to this movie.

Jan 9 - 09:40 AM

Hugh Whitehouse

I am forever greatful that I did not see the original film or read the book prior to watching Fincher's rendition of Dragon Tattoo. If for anything, just so I would not be compelled to make pretentious remarks about how it does not measure up to the original and would be capable of judging it based on its own merits. I found it to be utterly engrossing. If Mara does not get a nod by the Academy then the entire film industry is a sham. Brilliantly acted, directed and filmed.

Jan 14 - 04:24 AM

Kenny Bellau

This is the same guy that gave that plot-less, mashed up piece of nonsense "Drive" 4 out of 4. Take this review with that in mind. Go seen this movie. It does the book proud. Rooney Mara has you leaving the theater thinking about nothing but her. Her performance, her bravery with the role, her ability to bring you into the strange working mind of Lizbeth, Rooney is simply awesome in this movie.

BTW, the critics gave Drive a 93%, the audience only a 79%. Shows you the influence that Hollywood has over the critics. It's usually the other way around because people don't like admitting they made a bad choice in movies/dinner/car/neighborhood. People like to pump up their own taste as good taste, even if it turned out to be a bad choice. We all do it. Critics are supposed to be above that.

Jan 18 - 09:42 AM

Alex Marshall

Drive was plotless? Are you crazy? Drive was one of the most gripping and dazzling movies of 2011 with a great plot, excellent storytelling, memorable characters, and a gracious nod to films like Taxi Driver and Bullitt.
You can't seriously argue that a film critic's credibility is tarnished when he likes a movie that 93% of others like him also liked. Which leads me to my next rebuttal. Your argument about "Hollywood's influence on people" is incredibly invalid. The film won Best Director at Cannes months before it was screened for these critics. Also the film was made by a Danish film director and was released by an independent film studio, so there's no "Hollywood influence" involved here. And if Hollywood really did have the "influence" you say they do, how come all of the fully Hollywood approved movies like the countless Big Momma sequels or Transformers movies fail to "influence" movie critics. Because they suck: bland, boring characters, putting visual effects and potty humor over decent storytelling, and terrible editing and camerawork.
You say that movies like Drive have 93% critic ratings and have 79% audience ratings when it's usually the other way around. Let me explain why that happens: Average people eat up the garbage Hollywood spews like Transformers, Twilight, and Adam Sandler movies on a weekly basis while seasoned and educated film critics have decent enough tastes to look over the gloss and sparkle and see the steaming dog turd for what it really is. Then when films like Drive, Tree of Life, and Melancholia come out and require the audience to think about what they are seeing, those film critics are smart enough to understand them, while average film-goers expect nonstop action, big-breasted women, endless fart jokes, basically anything to distract a viewer from its shoddy script and characters. But they don't get any of that, so they label the movie as bad, and in some cases, try to rationalize their ignorance and stupidity by calling everyone who liked those movies as "pseudo-intellectuals." I have 2 years of film college under my belt right now, which includes editing and film aesthetics, all of which Drive has in spades and uses them to peerless detail. I don't need to fake my intelligence to call a great movie great. For all I know, I could be talking to a person who doesn't have any idea what film aesthetics are, so against me, my college professors who taught me these things, and the 93% of film critics who took the same classes that I did at my age who all loved and adored Drive, your argument holds no water.

Mar 29 - 10:15 PM

Chris Omiwade

Nominated for 5 Academy awards...I think it left a mark...

Jan 29 - 11:25 PM

Vadim Voroshilov

Pfft, then it's obvious the entire system needs to be overridden and re-instituted.

Jun 14 - 06:20 PM

Aaron Biasini

SORRY PETER I AM GOING TO PUT YOU AS A NON BELIEVER ON THIS ONE.

THIS FILM IN MY OPINION WAS THE BEST MYSTERY/THRILLER I HAVE SEEN IN A VERY LONG TIME.

AND CONTRARY TO POPULAR BELIEF IT WAS DARING!!!!!

Mar 4 - 06:49 AM

Opening this week

Movies

New on DVD

DVD

Who's In Theaters This Weekend?

Celebrities

What's Hot on Rotten Tomatoes

News

Spotlight

Critics

Critic Review - Rolling Stone

Comments