14 January – 13 February 2013
Formar: Paperback

“The Industrialist

Henrik Vanger, head of the dynastic Vanger Corporation, is tormented by the loss of a child decades earlier and convinced that a member of his family has committed murder.

The Journalist

Mikael Blomkvist delves deep into the Vangers’ past to uncover the truth behind the unsolved mystery. But someone else wants the past to remain a secret and will go to any lengths to keep it that way.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Lisbeth Salander, the enigmatic, delinquent and dangerous security specialist, assists in the investigation. A genius computer hacker, she tolerates no restrictions placed upon her by individuals, society or the law.“

I watched the film adaptation of this book (The Daniel Craig version) just before I started reading this and I found it quite hard to understand. Now that I have read the book, the storyline is clearer to me now, although I feel like the film did miss quite a bit of the book, especially the last few chapters. The only part I still say I don’t understand very well is how Blomkvist gets ‘done over’ at the beginning – I felt that there was a lot of terms I didn’t know, but the ending did explain what happened a lot better. I just found the beginning very slow and I put that down to not understanding what had happened.

I’m definitely going to keep on reading this set of books, I find the writing and how the story fits together very interesting and I look forward to seeing how the next two books pan out, I have an idea of what could happen but I’m not entirely sure.

Rating: 8/10

Next book: The Girl Who Played With Fire by Stieg Larsson

Also: I am also reading another book ‘part-time’, which I am having to read in secret and will only be able to do so at certain times. I can’t say what it is until I finish it because if I do it will no doubt get destroyed! I will explain all at a later date…..

*SPOILERS AHEAD*

Plot:  So this American version of the first book in the Millennium Trilogy is casted by Daniel Craig as Mikael Blomkvist—you might recognize him, he playes OO7 in the recent James Bond films and Rooney Mara as Lisbeth Salander.

Who are they?  Blomkvist is the journalist who lost against Wennerstrom in a David vs. Goliath scandal case.  He lost his savings and his good reputation.  Later on as Blomkvist seeks refuge away from prying eyes, Henrik Vanger hires him to find out who killed his niece, Harriet Vanger.

As Blomkvist accepts the case, he decides that he needs an assistant/researcher and hires the best person for the job—the same person who did the background check on him, Lisbeth Salander.

Enters Lisbeth in all her sullen, skinny, pierced glory and prickly attitude.  But first, a little background of her plot line.  For some reason, back in her shady past, she had been declared as mentally insane.  Her former guardian has a stroke and so all her finances are then in the hands of one of the filthiest, rapist, pigs of the story, Bjurman.   Bjurman not only forces Lisbeth to perform oral sex, but anal as well for her allowance and access to her funds.

Not to despair, Lisbeth then gives as good as she got.  She tazes Bjurman, tattoos him as the monster he is, and also obtain evidence of his crimes.  She says that she will be watching him if he tries anything.

With Lisbeth’s help and top notch hacker ways, Mikael puts together all the mysterious names and numbers in Harriet’s diary.  They were the names and bible quotes of the women her Dad (Gottfried Vanger) had killed.  Mikael then realizes that the day Harriet disappeared; Martin had lied about his alibi.  As Mikael snoops around Martin’s house, he get gets attacked and ends up hooked in Martin’s basement.  Martin gets ready to torture Mikael but Lisbeth appears in time to save the day.  As Martin escapes, his car skids off the road into a fiery crash.

Blomkvist then deduced that there was another way for Harriett to survive.  The Harriett then is now the “Anita Vanger” of today.  It turned out her cousin hid her in the trunk of her car as she left Hedeby Island that day.  Harriett had decided to escape the day of her disappearance when she saw that Martin Vanger was in town and would blackmail her for the rest of her life.  What was Harriett’s secret?  Martin saw that Harriett had killed their Dad back when she was fourteen.  She had been raped by him and so saw the opportunity to kill him when she had the chance.  Sadly for Harriett, Martin saw to take his Dad’s place.  Harriett knew she had to escape and so told Anita.  Harriett survived by living under Anita’s married name in London.  It wasn’t that much of a hassle considering both girls looked alike.

In the end, Harriett and Henrik Vanger reconcile.  Lisbeth admits for the first time that she has feelings for someone, Blomkvist.  Sadly, Lisbeth watches dejectedly from afar as Blomkvist gets back together with his editor in chief and on-and-off-again lover, Erika Berger.

Characters:  Good guys-Lisbeth Salander, Mikael Blomkvist, Dragan Armansky, Henrik Vanger, Harriet Vanger

Bad guys-Nils Bjurman, Martin Vanger, Gottfried Vanger

BOTTOM LINE:  If you want a complex murder mystery movie that is based in Sweden, then this is for you.  Keep in mind this is an ADULT movie.  Nudity, sex, and violence are in it.

I’m holding judgment on how good this movie is, considering that I didn’t see the Swedish version yet.

CAROLINA HERRERA
I must say, it takes a little to get used to the sight but the more I look at it, the more I am in awe: Combining Turtleneck-Sweaters with super long wool skirts? Carolina, you are a sweet sweet genius! Love it, as well as the rest of the Collection!

MM6 MAISON MARTIN MARGIELA
Very Punk, very Lisbeth Salander, very Martin Margiela: Fall and Winter will be dark in Margiela-Land! Creepers, Parkas and Overknee-Stockings in black, grey and brown with a hint of color like Red or Green will be my favorite Trend this upcoming Season! I like! A lot.

 
MARC BY MARC JACOBS
Big Hair was the credo for Marc Jacob’s Show yesterday in New York. And his whole collection followed the whole “Farrah Fawcett gone curly”-Theme with Satin-Dresses, Jumpers and Pencilskirts in the best “70s meets Moviestar”-Way possible. I adore the simple yet eyecatching all-over-prints in blue and red.

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

A disgraced reporter and an emotionally-troubled/intellectually-gifted ward of the state pair up to solve a forty-year old locked door mystery. In the process of investigating what happened to a young woman who vanished without a trace from an island estate, they end up solving a much bigger set of mysteries– and putting their lives in peril in the process.

Both of the lead characters are well-developed and sympathetic, if not necessarily likable in a conventional sense. Mikael Blomkvist is a bit of womanizer or at least a lady’s man– whatever you wish to call him, he sleeps with at least three major female characters over the course of the book. He is also rash (or, perhaps, aggressive) in his professional life. However, he is also pragmatic and kind. Lisbeth Salander is not just tattooed but also pierced, leather-clad, and goth. Her story of female empowerment may be largely responsible for the wild success of this book. When she finds herself abused and violated, she takes matters into her own hands. Her strength and intelligence, wrapped in a package that suggests neither trait, is beguiling.

The book is obviously highly readable, but it’s oddly structured. It climaxes early, leaving well over a hundred pages at the end to wrap up subplots. This includes the disposition of Blomkvist’s professional predicament and the question of with whom he will ride off into the sunset. These are threads that couldn’t be left hanging, but it begs the question of why one reads to the bitter end– though you certainly will.

I guess I should mention that this isn’t a book for the faint of heart or the puritanical– in case one hadn’t already grasped that. It is graphic and intense in spots.

I did see the Daniel Craig/Rooney Mara version of the movie. I’m told it was not as good as the first film, which was made is Sweden (I should have mentioned the book is set in Sweden.) However, I thought it was quite good, and fairly true to the book given the challenges of turning a 650 page novel into a movie.

View all my reviews

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (2011 American Version) is intense. It’s no sweet pie. It’s raw meat. No cherries on top. Not intended for all audiences. I, unlike many, have not read the book, so I didn’t know what to expect. And oh my what a surprise. More than a murder mystery, it’s a crude story with a wounded heart. Lisbeth Salander was well portrayed by Rooney Mara. She stole the show. The guy, well he did his part. It’s a long movie, so I didn’t pick up much the first time. The plot is simple, prove he’s not lying, get his reputation back. But they add another layer, a murder mystery. Then top it off with bitter icing, her life story. I felt the pain, the fear, the solitude, the shame, the frustration. But there’s always a glimmer at the end of the tunnel. She’s got firm feet. You might put her down and make her trip and fall. But she get up pretty quick. And you better watch your back. The murder mystery is sick. A pure psychopath they had to deal with. I missed some important details, because I was quite baffled when solved. I didn’t see that coming. The proving the case was confusing also. Didn’t understand all the stuff she did and how that helped, but case was solved. The ending. I don’t know what to make of either. Makes me wonder who was the main character. That I know of it’s Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig). But the ending was more to do with Lisbeth. Unless it ended way before that and that was just part of her resolution.. Guess I need to watch again. Do I recommend this movie? Depends. If you’re into Silence Of The Lambs type of movies, then yes, gotta watch it. If you read the book then you know what you’re getting into. But if not, then no, I suggest to pass this movie. It is an intense, rated R movie with very graphic scenes and strong sexual subjects. If I had known, I might had thought it twice and passed, but I did and got through it. Just like Mysterious Skin. Once watched, you can never unwatch. Reading the book is goal next.

Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

26TH MARCH 2012

For the longest time, I avoided reading this book. It was such a huge best seller, but I felt that it would be predictable. Then I saw the movie – the Swedish version and fell in love with Lisbeth Salander. There are so many things that I admire about this character – I like the way she looks at the concept of right and wrong. Infact I wish the justice system were more like her.

Truth is that I am sick of terrible people getting away with everything just because we are so damn forgiving. Sometimes I feel forgiveness is just another word for cowardice. We are too afraid to confront, so we forgive. A better way would be to beat the shit out of the jerk in the dark. Heheh. And what’s with the whole concept of understanding the psychology of the person who screwed others. As Salander says, “He had the same chance that everyone had.”

Here’s what I propose: every man who is caught doing something wrong will be wronged in the very same way – that’s his punishment. So rapists would be raped, serial killers will be hunted, tortured, toyed with and then killed, molesters will be molested, muggers would be mugged exactly the same way they mug other people, rude people will be spoke to rudely and the list goes on and on and on! The law would be enforced and free psychological counseling would be provided for anyone who has these urges. That’s where the psychologists are required. Imagine how rapidly the crime rate would decline. There would still be those who go ahead and commit crimes and they would be the real nut cases. We’ll make a real nice place/jail for them.

So, back to Lisbeth Salander. I like her. Steig Larrson is not going to be my favorite author for a long time because he writes so factually. That being said, he created Lisbeth Salander and for that I’ll read every book of his.

The girl who played with fire

Girl who played with fire

20TH APRIL 2012

The week before I left for Kerala, I was reading “The girl who played with fire” by Stieg Larrson. I loved Lisbeth Salander in it. Once again, it’s eery how well I can relate to her. I remember the time when I was a teenager and used to dress in black and had a really short haircut and was more boy than girl. This happened because I felt that was the only way I would be taken seriously.

There is also an undercurrent of rage that any woman can relate to. You see how acceptable rape and child abuse it..you see how common place death is and you are angry. Everyday I meet people who make me go a little Lisbeth. Ok, now about this book. I’m not going to give away much – just that it’s got a sex-trafficking-mafia-government angle. Funny how all those words make sense together. Lisbeth is the victim who refuses to be victimized. The way that she is hounded by authoritarian figures is similar to the way strong women are usually targeted by insecure men in high places. I like Lisbeth for her resourcefulness and, oh well, so many things. I feel like I’m reading about an ill-fated version of myself in these pages.

Read the book and I liked it. I can’t understand how Stieg Larsson can write such boring pages about everyone else and such amazing stuff about Lisbeth. Whatever it is, it’s way better than the first book and I can understand how everyone likes it so much.

The girl who kicked the hornets nest

Gilr who kicked the Hornet’s Nest

2ND MAY 2012

Just finished reading the last book in the Dragon Tattoo trilogy. Ah, this year has been about trilogies and sequels. But at-least I’m reading. Okay, getting back to the book, it’s fabulous. I feel that it’s better than the first two books. By now I’m used to Steig Larssons’ way of writing and somehow all the extra information he gave was worth it. And there was a lot of that! Let’s see now: information on how to run a paper, magazine, security company, police investigation, hire a lawyer etc etc.

I feel much smarter after reading the book and I’m going to miss the characters. One thing that was funny was how Mikael Blomkvist is always breaking all the ladies’ hearts. I mean, have these chicks not heard of dating more than one man at the same time? Was the author imagining himself as the all powerful Blomkvist? Hehe…we’ll never know. The author died soon after submitting these manuscripts and he never got to see how successful it turned out. I’m happy that he submitted all three manuscripts.

I watched the movie before I read these books and I have to say something – the books are better. Except for the way the serial killer died in the first part (the movie did a better job!), the books were more detailed. However, the movie or the set of three movies did catch the very essence of it and I’m happy about that.

Ok, work done. I wonder what I will read next. The Twilight series awaits. Sigh.

Score: 75

The success of a good thriller relies on two fundamental aspects. We see thrillers, first, for the exhilaration of simultaneously being guided through a labyrinthine plot and shut out from its best secrets, and then, ultimately for a reveal both profound and believable. A thriller is a film which thrills us with the process and act of discovery. Steven Soderbergh’s Side Effects is that movie. Until the reveal. The film rips through its first three-quarters. Then, screenwriter Scott Z. Burns seems to have found himself in a corner. By the end, ethics are a farce useful only as one of many tools to protect reputation, the characters have shifted only slightly from our initial impressions, and the reveal is so unsatisfying I at first thought–then crossed my fingers–that it, too, was simply another puzzle piece. It wasn’t. But boy, is it a hell of a trip.

Emily Taylor (Rooney Mara) just got her husband, Martin (Channing Tatum), back from prison. He’d served four years for insider-trading.  Not that he seems to have learned much. Emily, who has a history of mental illness, is struggling again, and following an episode enlists the help of a psychiatrist (Jude Law). Dr. Jonathan Banks prescribes pill regimen after pill regimen. He’s British, and when asked later in the film he sites as his motive for relocation cultural differences regarding mental illness: the attitude in the states is that a therapist is an indication of someone “getting better”, rather than “being sick”. However, instead of Emily’s variety of pills making her well, she further suffers, until a recommended new drug returns her sex drive impressively and calms her anxieties. The drug was recommended to Emily by a friend and to Dr. Banks by Emily’s former psychiatrist Dr. Victoria Siebert (Catherine Zeta-Jones).

That is as far as I’m willing to go. Assume, then, that something, somehow and somewhere, goes quite wrong. The film’s opening shot tells us as much. And know that Soderbergh weaves Burns’s twists briskly. The story is quick, dense, and at times choppy, but Soderbergh delivers with his typical chic coolness. The lights glow and softly extend, like radioactive tufts. The film is toned with reds and yellows, tinted with a subtle green. It’s as if we are inside the flesh of a human being–that the psychology onscreen is representative of humanity’s chaotic interior. Soderbergh’s other films have similar effects.

No, the faucet is not an angel.

Mara plays a role opposite her Lisbeth Salander. In David Fincher’s Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011), Mara was lurid, blunt, embalmed with a sinister sense of justice. Here, Mara is lucid, floating through the film in a stupor and contouring around the more mysterious parts of her character. She is at once seductive and unstable. Though consistently engaging, she is not always compelling. Her typecasting is spot on, and she doesn’t disappoint. Law is our sleuth. From the start he seems to have a vague sense of truth. He finds it in the film in doses. In one of Dr. Banks’s first meetings with Emily, Law sits in front of a pair of windows. The window framing Law’s head is clear. The adjacent window is grey. Law’s Dr. Banks is not a character quite in range of black and white. He is a smudge, a partial example of something else.

NOTE: Not a paparazzi photo of Rooney Mara after THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO (2011).

Soderbergh litters signs throughout Side Effects, particularly in the opening act. Emily enters a subway station and a vibrant red, white-lettered exit sign (with appropriate arrow) hangs over a police officer. At another point, Emily and Martin sit on their apartment building’s roof in a long shot, a road lined with billboards and advertisements extending straight away from their building. They’re even sitting underneath one. The film’s conflict and tension revolve around deception (or at least the suspicion of trickery), and deception at the hands of lies whose truths should so visibly be seen. These are arrogant characters, self-assured and haughty. Each knows at least a portion of the truth, but none of them consider accepting it unless on their manipulative terms.

The titular phrase “side effects” is an array of unintended repercussions. Though I find this parallel far more convenient than insightful, the film seems similar: Side Effects daydreams through sexuality and seduction, moral ambiguity, and distrust–all of which have been Soderbergh’s preoccupation since sex, lies, and videotape (1989) two decades ago. Thematically here, they cohere well, as they should. How much more familiar can a filmmaker be with his artistic obsession? Thomas Newman’s score is certainly a worthy glue, and the precise accompaniment necessary for the film. With a screenplay that didn’t shortcut its story at its most crucial juncture, Soderbergh’s swan song would’ve perhaps ranked near his best. That said, even at majority strength, Soderbergh exercises once again the craft and voice that has turned him into a respected, now, industry loss.

———————————————————————————————————————————————–

Official Trailer

Rated: R (sexuality, nudity, violence, and language)

DIRECTED BY: Steven Soderbergh

WRITTEN BY: Scott Z. Barns

FEATURING: Rooney Mara, Jude Law, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Channing Tatum

Running time: 1hr. 46min.

Released: February 8, 2013

Open Road Films

 Follow Kyle @KyleBurton9106

The guessing game about a sequel to Hollywood’s Girl with the Dragon Tattoo continues, afloat on a sea of speculation — informed, uninformed, half-formed, whatever. The latest twist (red-herring?) in this mini-saga comes from Mara herself, who told the entertainment press that she wants “in” and denied rumors that her hotter-than-ever co-star Daniel Craig doesn’t.

There has also been some speculation that if Craig is not available because of scheduling or money issues, Blomkvist could simply be pruned from the script. The rationale here is that The Girl Who Played with Fire is focused almost entirely on Salander. While we should never sell Hollywood short when it comes to torturing original material, it would seem highly unlikely in this case. The rumor mill forgets that our crusading journalist is indispensable to the book’s key plot points: the exposing of the human trafficking scandal, defending Salander to the police when she becomes a murder suspect, and rescuing her after her harrowing, bloody showdown with Niedermann and Zalachenko.

Two of the more “newsy” stories are the MTV.com report that includes the Fincher dimension and the AccessHollywood story that leans more toward “maybe” and ”I hope so”. We reprint the latter below.

Oh, well, something to distract us from the Sweden-like cold snap here in the Northeast. Why couldn’t we be bundled up with Larsson’s fourth book instead?

Rooney Mara: I ‘Hope’ To Make Dragon Tattoo Sequels; Actress Says Daniel Craig Also Game To Return

Whatever the reasoning has been for the failure to shoot the follow up to 2011’s “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo,” franchise star Rooney Mara says it’s not for lack of enthusiasm from the film’s cast.

Access Hollywood caught up with the 27-year-old beauty at the premiere of her new thriller “Side Effects,” where she said she’d love to don Lisbeth Salander’s combat boots, piercings and extensive body ink once again.

“I don’t know. I hope so!” she told Access with a broad grin, when asked if there are plans to begin shooting “The Girl Who Played with Fire” — the next film in the English-language version series based on Stieg Larsson’s Millennium Trilogy. “But I don’t know.”

The actress also shot down rumors claiming a second film may be made without Rooney’s co-star Daniel Craig (who plays journalist Mikael Blomkvist in the film based on the best-selling books).

“No, that’s not a possibility. That won’t happen,” she said, when asked if the film would be made without Daniel. “I don’t know who started that rumor, but that’s not true.”

As previously reported on AccessHollywood.com, back in October, Daniel said he would most definitely be up for making the “…Played With Fire” installment.

“Of course I’ll embrace [the movie], especially if [David] Fincher does it,” Daniel told The LA Times of the possible sequel, referencing the first film’s director.

While David has yet to direct a sequel in his storied career, Daniel said he planned to attempt to persuade him to sign on for the next film.

“I’m definitely going to work on him,” he said.

Today we have a TV spot for Dead Man Down and a featurette.  I would recommend checking them both out.  I am super excited for this film and both of these have me salivating even more.  Take a look at both below:

You can pick up the far superior version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo here.

Dead Man Down opens March 8, 2013.

Related articles

• “Revenge . . .I’ve never thought about it before.” Dead Man Down trailer (bizzammovienews.com)

Millenium magazine are putting together another controvertial issue – after the success of the magazine after the Wennerstrom affair, they are in a powerful position which they have every intention of using. After being approached by a young journalist, Dag Svensson and his girlfriend, Mia Johansson who have been digging up information on sex trafficking, Mikael Blomkvist, the journalist responsible for the exposé on Wennestrom, they agree to publish an issue based on this topic to expose the powerful figures running the industry. Unfortunately the digging around by Svensson and Johansson has gained the wrong kind of attention…When the young couple are found dead in their Stolkholm apartment by Mikael Blomkvist along with the murder weapon, it seems like a straightforward investigation for Inspector Bublanski as the killer’s fingerprints are all over the gun. Lisbeth Salander, experienced computer hacked and social outcast due to her unpredictable and often violent behaviour, is wanted for murder but although the world remains convinced of her guilt, Mikael Blomkvist, remains convinced of her innocence and conducts his own investigations into these strange events.

This book was entertaining from the world go. It’s hard to put down, extremely original and full to the brim with unexpected twists in the plot. The unfortunate thing about this novel is that I already knew the plot so the mystery of the novel was somewhat lost on me… that said, for the book to still remain extremely captivating regardless of this fact is evidence enough that this was a great book and an integral part of what is a fantastic series. Lisbeth Salander, as a character, is an amazing and unusual heroine for a book but I found that as with the last book, elements of her personality struck strong chords within mine which made her even more likeable and Mikael Blomkvist’s good nature and determination is a blessing in a book full of ‘Men who hate women’. All in all, at no point does this book become dull and with a powerful ending and cliffhanger, it’s no wonder this series is bestselling across the world and I’m saddened that the death of Larsson means he can’t share any more of his amazing literary skill with the world.

I experienced enormous cinema culture shock when I started watching the Swedish film The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, especially after starting with the American version. The base of the American film industry is aesthetic appeal. American films find beautiful people to speak a few lines over a backdrop of impressive special effects or exquisite cinematography. Based on the latest ticket sale statistics, I would say that most people don’t care about the plot or dialogue as long as the film features beautiful people and/or explosions. It creates a world that is entirely false and overly appealing, creating the movie-going “experience.” This beauty takes whatever happens on screen and makes its reality impossible. Realistic movies are usually seen as gritty and not widely released. The Swedish versions of the Millennium trilogy could not be more different.

One issue I had with the American film was the character of Lisbeth Salander. American film has a tendency to insert a token female into a superhero role with little caveats: she saves the world with her male counterpart, or because she is in love with him, or he saves the world because he is in love with her, not because of her, and she does it all in a spandex outfit. Protective padding and chest plates? Weaponry? Helmets? No. Female superheroes have powers like invisibility (which only works when stripped naked, naturally). I can see how Lisbeth Salander would become an issue for American cinema. She is not naked, unless it is for sexual intercourse, primarily with women, and her nakedness reveals a heck of a lot of tattoos. She has superpowers that are real, muscular, and sweaty, such as kickboxing and driving a fast motorbike. She is also very smart and solves problems on her own. What to do, American cinema? What to do?

The American Girl with the Dragon Tattoo tried to skirt the line between accurate representation of a brutal book and audience appeasement via the characters of Lisbeth Salander and Mikael Blomkvist. They took the same dialogue and plot, but inserted someone who resembles a supermodel (Rooney Mara) and the future James Bond (Daniel Craig). In the Swedish film series, there is absolutely no skirting, especially on the part of our dear Salander.

The Swedish films present Noomi Rapace as Lisbeth Salander, and she plays Salander exactly as the books describe. Her Salander is tiny but muscular as hell, thanks to years of kickboxing. Both Salander and her “girlfriend,” Miriam Wu, have fantastic fight scenes where they try to save themselves (from murder and kidnapping, respectively) by kickboxing the hell out of their aggressors. It is impressive and realistic, because it doesn’t always save them. There are also scenes in the book where Salander finds guns, cocks ‘em back, and shoots all the motherf***ers in the place, accurately. You wonder where she learned how to a) find guns b) hold guns c) work guns and d) shoot guns, accurately. Again, props to Rapace’s Salander. She holds a gun like a person who really, really wants to look like she knows how to hold a gun and really, really hopes she can shoot a person with it. Most of the time, Rapace’s Salander does not shoot the person she is trying to shoot. This is probably more accurate, especially in a scene in the third film where she is trying to shoot someone after being buried alive and with three bullets in her body. Again, come on. I understand adrenaline rushes, but when you lose that much blood and only weigh 90 pounds to begin with, you are not going to be shooting and killing Ronald Niedermann. It’s just not happening.

A huge difference between our American and Swedish Salanders is the tattoo. The tattoo is a source of awe and intrigue throughout the books, and you never find out why Salander has it. The representation of the tattoo was a huge part of bringing the character to life. In the American version, the tattoo is very elegant, and looks like a traditional Chinese dragon illustration. It is large but not horrifying, and it fits well on her back. It is ferocious yet sensual, showing Salander as both a lover and a fighter. In the Swedish version, the tattoo takes up her entire back, and the dragon is three-dimensionally ripping itself through her flesh. You can feel the anger seething out of the dragon, and wonder what happened to this girl to make her want to tear the emotion from her body so violently. This is definitely more of what you picture after reading about Lisbeth Salander. She gets tattoos as reminders of lessons she’s learned, and both the tattoo and the lesson are usually quite painful.

As you finish the Millennium trilogy, things get a little crazy. It felt like the author, Stieg Larsson, loved his Salander so much that he couldn’t let her get hurt again, so he made her unrealistic and invincible. Luckily, the Swedish films took his invincible fighting robot and made her human.

Lisbeth Salander, the modern-day heroine, has stirred the hearts of readers and viewers alike. Women respond to the the small-boned, anorexically thin character as if she were the new Joan of Arc. Why is that? For one, Salander packs a lot of punch. In a world of computer geeks, she’s a superb hacker who uses her skills on the side of justice, actually eradicating the bank accounts of a high-powered, shady billionaire who had formerly been able to commit his crimes undetected. The fact that she does so without getting caught — no matter how believable or unbelievable that may seem — doesn’t thwart the feeling she arouses in us. I have to admit, reading the Millennium Series by Stieg Larsson and watching the Swedish film versions of the novel have me ready to take on adversaries with a new gusto.

Do we normally like to watch female characters who enact revenge? Our sensibilities say, Oh no, but our feelings say, Go get ‘em girl. We support Salander because the issues underscoring her motivations — rape, physical violence, societal neglect, child abuse, government fraud — are so vile that we are aware her only recourse for survival has been to attain justice through her own means. It’s a road we wouldn’t normally want to travel. But when push comes to shove, who’s to say what anyone would do, especially in life-threatening situations.

I venture to say that none of us likes having the deck stacked against us. Salander’s obective is to even the score. Although her father was despicable, beating and violating Salander’s mother whenever he wished, he was protected by government agencies who viewed him as an asset. A fictional scenario that easily relates to real-life events.

Empowering women through the creation of strong female characters is an art in itself. Larsson did a superb job with Salander. He was able to create a sympathetic character — vulnerable yet fearless, violated yet undefeatable, a survivor of injustice but never a victim. Friends of the late author relate that an incident from Larsson’s teenage years — when several friends gang-raped a girl and he stood by and did nothing to help her — inspired his creation of  Salander’s character.

In his Millennium trilogy — The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, The Girl Who Played with Fire, and The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest – Stieg Larsson gives us a sensitive male perspective of the female plight, a dilemma which is global in scope. He covers the issues of sex trafficking, physical abuse, violence, and subjugation in the political and professional world. In a discussion series I developed, Women’s Empowerment in Fiction: The Millennium Trilogy Explored, we reviewed Larsson’s themes and their effects on the women in the group. It’s amazing that no matter how unsavory Salander’s methods were, most women felt empowered and inspired by her character. And why wouldn’t they be? Salander willingly enters dangerous lairs like an avenging lioness in order to exact justice. She’s courageous, brilliant, unstoppable, outrageous, and ballsy. Without question, Larsson created a fiction showstopper, one that slam-dunks female typecasting in novels in one fell swoop. Disturbed or enthralled by her, the character of Lisbeth Salander is one for the books.

Photograph by David Sims. Published in Vogue, February 2013.

The February issue of Vogue features a profile of actress Rooney Mara, who played Lisbeth Salander in the Hollywood/David Fincher version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo movie that debuted in December 2011. It’s a worthwhile character study of the Academy Award nominee.

The article opens with this word picture:

Before Rooney Mara was cast as Lisbeth Salander—the heroine of Stieg Larsson’s novels—the only thing edgy about her looks were her enviable cheekbones and piercing blue eyes. Her traditional beauty underscored her lineage: Born in 1985 in Bedford, a tiny suburb of New York, she is the great-granddaughter of the founders of both the Pittsburgh Steelers and the New York Giants. But her preparation for her role as the antisocial computer hacker in the Millennium trilogy consumed her. Her chestnut locks vanished beneath a sheet of black, razor-sharp hair; her ivory skin was made somehow paler; she was covered in piercings and tattoos; and her girlish softness was replaced by sinew and muscle….

Read more here.

I was a bit concerned that the second and third films would lose the “grittiness” that characterizes the second and third books in the trilogy. American films love violence, especially shooting, but they manage to show violence in a way that distracts from the fact that it’s violent: if we make the car explosion pretty enough, people will forget that the three people inside the car are dead, and it doesn’t matter anyway because they are “bad guys.” Director Daniel Alfredson shies from neither grit nor guts, and it leads to ultimate glory.

The second film involves a ton of exposition. In a nutshell, someone is murdering people and blaming it on Salander. She goes into hiding, leaving Blomkvist to try to figure out who it is and why they want Salander behind bars. It culminates in a shoot-out between Salander and her foes, leaving her comatose with a bullet in her brain and wanted not only for the previous murders but the attempted murder of the person trying to kill her. This book is crazy, but the film takes it all in stride, creating an exciting but thorough tie-in between the first and third films.

The third book brings everything together in a remarkable satisfactory way, considering everything that needed brought together. Any film adaptation would need exceptional courage and drive; luckily, the give-all attitude of the second film rolls on into the third.

In the first scene of this film, a surgeon cuts off the top of Salander’s head and removes the bullet from her brain, and you realize how perfect the final film in the series is going to be. This scene allows for the gritty overall feel of the films while letting the viewer know just how vulnerable our heroine has become. It’s the perfect set-up for the rest of the film, which takes us through Salander trying to decide how to best defend herself in court. It covers a lot of ground but moves at a good pace, which is necessary; by that point you are simply dying to know how this will end (I had read the book and was still in agony).

The only thing I have to say about the Swedish Millennium is that they messed up the end. Not enough that I will be throwing my Blockbuster card out the window, but enough that I was a teensy bit disappointed in their otherwise stunning adaptation. At the end of the books, Salander and Blomkvist get back together. Not together together, but together enough. Blomkvist deserves that much. Yes, he is a playboy, but he works his butt off for Salander and is fiercely loyal to her. If Salander did not let him back into her life at least a little, I would have questioned the otherwise unquestionable strength of the moral fibers of my favorite heroine. In the final scene of the final film, he walks away, and that is not OK with me. Before the credits roll, there is a bit of a pause where you are just staring at a still shot of some Swedish waterway, as if the movie knew that it had one more scene it needed to show.

Reading the Millennium trilogy (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, The Girl who Played with Fire, and The Girl who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest) was an incredible experience. Watching them play out in the Swedish film series was undeniable. The Swedish films are certainly a cinematic culture shock, but a welcome one, especially when applied to this exceptional book trilogy. I highly recommend all versions of Millennium to anyone interested in a fast-paced thriller with a truly great heroine at its helm. It’s a ship that will not go down without a fight.

Before we begin, I would like to state a few logistical details to keep my readers rolling. The Millennium trilogy is tough to discuss, as it has a book series (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, The Girl who Played with Fire, and The Girl who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest by Stieg Larsson; originally in Swedish, translated), a complete film trilogy (Swedish), a television mini-series (Swedish), and a film of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (American). I have a review of the American film here. In this article, unless otherwise stated, “the Millennium trilogy” will reference either the complete book trilogy or the Swedish film trilogy; “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” will reference the first book in the trilogy; “the American film” will reference the American film The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo; and “the Swedish films” will reference the complete Swedish film trilogy. There are two directors of the Swedish film trilogy, and they are specifically referenced as needed. The television mini-series will not be referenced. Good luck!

The Millennium trilogy was a book series that exhilarated me so greatly I was afraid to see the films. My experience with book-to-movie adaptations has been so-so at best, especially in recent American studio attempts. I was terribly afraid this would happen with the Millennium trilogy, but once again, Millennium did not disappoint.

My experience with the films was divided. I actually preferred the American version of the first film to the Swedish version. I feel like the director of the Swedish version, Niels Arden Oplev, didn’t really know how to take on the massive needs of this novel. I don’t fault him. The book is huge in scope, and is followed by two more books that need a pretty solid set-up to make the desired impact. Unfortunately, Oplev’s Tattoo didn’t really provide this set-up. The second and third films, directed by Daniel Alfredson, are impeccable. If the American film team wants to take on the second and third novels (I hope they do), they really just need to insert their actors into exact same script.

The American film version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, directed by David Fincher, was very, very good. I kind of picked at it in my review, but that was more of a commentary on the aesthetic standards of American cinema, not the film itself. I will say it again—it was very, very good. Books are great because they can take the time to mix character explanation with plot exploration. Movies do not have this luxury, and the American film took on Larsson’s mountain of exquisitely complicated character and plot developments with a well-designed pickaxe. The first book is a doozy, spilling out unprecedented and possibly hazardous twists and turns like a roller coaster designed by an excited intern. The film does an excellent job of narrowing and summarizing the plot and making it relevant to the character development. Lisbeth Salander and Mikael Blomkvist develop an understandable relationship over the course of their joint investigation, and you understand why she is a bit heartbroken at the end of the film. The circle is full and poised to roll into an equally impressive sequel.

Oplev’s Tattoo did not create the necessary relationship between Salander and Blomkvist to weather the storm of the series. Oplev’s film shows them working mostly apart and coming to conclusions on their own and having sex a few times. This is not the kind of relationship that makes a journalist risk his career to prove the innocence of a crime-convicted computer hacker and an alleged sociopath to think of this journalist as her friend. The Swedish films avoid most of the relationships in the books, and for the most part, I approve of this. Blomkvist sleeps with just about every female character in the books. We do not need to waste screen time understanding he is a playboy. However, we do need to understand why these two people are suddenly so connected that they would risk their lives for each other even after their professional relationship has ended.

In the second and third Swedish films, the connection between Salander and Blomkvist is obvious, but you would not understand where it came from just by seeing the first Swedish film. In the American film, the relationship is solid. We see it end to end, from Salander hacking Blomkvist’s private computer for a work assignment to him barging into her apartment to propose she join his investigation to the hours and hours they spend living and working together to solving a murder case. It shows the respect they have for each other’s professional skills and how that respect leads to lust and possibly love.

The first American movie provides the set-up that the second and third Swedish films deserve. The plot of the first book is nil in comparison to the next two, and the American film takes advantage of this calm-before-the-storm to create characters we respect, even if we can’t relate to their issues. Fincher takes what could easily be a crowd-pleasing gun-slinger and keeps it about the great characters Larsson created. It’s a great start to what I hope will be yet another Millennium trilogy.

My Rating: ★★★★☆

Having read The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, where Lisbeth is identified as a real world Pippi, I have been planning to read the supposed inspiration for a long time. For the first few chapters, it is hard to imagine how Larsson could have based the character of Lisbeth on Pippi. Eventually I learned to warp Pippi’s world and squeeze it into the supposedly real world filled with rapists and thieves, where little girls have no super strength to get by on. I could then start to see how Larsson could have imagined, reading Pippi as an adult, that each of pippi’s little ‘adventures’ could have been a tragedy. Out of a thousand, one might survive. He decided to write about that one, a modern-day Pippi. For, you probably still need Pippi’s attitude to survive in a modern-day Sweden even if you don’t have her super powers – Lisbeth might have been an orphan and a rebel just like Pippi, she might only have her hacking skills as a proxy for Pippi’s super-strength, but at the end of the day both could kick some ass.

The review you have just read above is meant to illustrate how my reading of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo influenced my reading of Pippi Longstocking. Is it fair to even think of Lisbeth and of Larsson’s interpretation of the tale while reading it? Probably not. I wish I could read it far away from Lisbeth’s shadow. Do I blame Larsson now for spoiling some good fun? Probably yes. I just wish I had read Astrid first – of course I might never have heard of Pippi if not for Larsson. This is an issue I have faced with many books where the source is as enjoyable as the book that referred me to it, but less enjoyable for having read the referring work. How to get around this? Shall I drop everything and run to a bookstore the moment the slightest footnote pops up? They better stock up before I read Ulysses then.

View all my reviews

Related articles

• Where is Lisbeth Salander’s home? A review of Millennium Tour in Stockholm (brandsandfilms.com)
• Pippi Longstocking…. (trishborgdorff.wordpress.com)
• Pippi Longstocking – the original INGRID VANG NYMAN illustrations (yeahgrace.wordpress.com)
• Pippi Longstocking – Prinny’s invitations for a 7th birthday (haillo.wordpress.com)
• A Vigilante Love Affair with Lisbeth Salander (pheonixreview.wordpress.com)
• High Hopes, Punctured by Pippi Longstocking (reflectionsoramirroroflife.wordpress.com)
• Pippi at Swedish Cottage Marionette Theatre (mommyfactor.net)

The Girl With The Dragon Tatoo. 2011. Estados Unidos. Dir: David Fincher.

En un capítulo de Breaking Bad Jesse Pinkman le pregunta a su novieta, la malograda Jane, cuáles fueron los motivos que llevaron a la artista Georgia O’keeffe a pintar la misma puerta de su casa doce veces. Jane responde que las cosas no son nunca lo mismo, que cambian dependiendo de la luz que incida en el objeto, del momento del día en que nos encontremos o del siempre variable estado de ánimo del artista. No existen dos cuadros iguales con el mismo modelo. Pinkman –que durante la serie ha demostrado cierta creatividad- solo entiende la repetición como una escalada a lo perfecto, para culminar un proceso artístico, para mejorar la técnica y mermar las diferencias entre la puerta de óleo y la puerta real; menosprecia el proceso creativo y además no encuentra en la pintura de O’keeffe ni rastro de las vaginas que Jane había mencionado. Un gran chasco de exposición para Jesse.

David Fincher aborda la saga Millennium de Stieg Larsson y la dota del empaque habitual de sus películas. Los títulos de crédito son apabullantes, recuerdan a los de la saga 007 pero mucho más revolucionados, frenéticos, al ritmo de música machacona. Fincher ha insertado la historia en una Suecia neblinosa, etérea, impermeable; la mansión Vanger, pozo de maldad insondable, la negrura bajo la epidermis helada, tranquila y resplandeciente. La isla Vanger conectada con la realidad a través de un único acceso; el puente-embudo por donde hay que pasar obligatoriamente, transigir. El director americano ha hecho suya la historia, no nos ha marcado la senda con un cartel luminoso como Niels Arden Oplev en su versión de 2009, donde expuso la tesis mantenida por muchos autores de novela negra nórdica: el nazismo subterráneo que carcome Escandinavia. El director americano lo insinúa pero prefiere centrarse en la propia encarnación del mal más que en su adscripción política. El elemento articulador del film, de la historia, sigue siendo Lisbeth Salander, interpretada de manera inmejorable en esta ocasión por Rooney Mara. Magnífica. La anti-diva de apariencia extremadamente frágil, comestible para la legión de aprovechados que encuentra en su camino. El caramelo envenenado de punk, humillación y justicia.

Título Original: Luftslottet som sprängdes

Autor: Stieg Larsson

Ano de lançamento: 2007 (Suécia)/2009 (Brasil)

Editora no Brasil: Companhia das Letras

Número de páginas: 685

Finalmente cheguei ao final da trilogia Millennium. Finalmente entre aspas, porque devo ter levado no máximo dois meses para finalizar os três livros, que chegam às quase 1800 páginas, somados. E eis que terminei o maior livro da série: A rainha do castelo de ar.

O livro é uma continuação direta do anterior, diferentemente de A menina que brincava com fogo para com Os homens que não amavam as mulheres. Por isso, era de se esperar um início mais rápido e sem enrolações, correto? Sim, porém é aí que as coisas se complicam.

O segundo livro da série claramente é onde há mais ação. Já o terceiro consegue ter menos ainda do que o primeiro. Entendo A rainha do castelo de ar como uma grande investigação. Lenta e enrolada. Veja bem, Larsson conseguiu fazer um livro inteiro investigativo sem muitas cenas violentas, mas a tensão prossegue mais ou menos igual, porque agora Mikael Blomkvist está correndo contra o tempo para salvar Lisbeth Salander do seu maior inimigo de todos os tempos: o próprio Estado sueco.

Como nos livros anteriores, Larsson prossegue com sua veia jornalística pulsante. Acredito que nesse livro isso se tornou muito mais latente e importante: o alvo agora não é tão-somente quem  pratica violência contra a mulher, mas sim contra um Estado permissivo e cheio de manobras ilegais e inconstitucionais para proteger seu bem próprio, travestindo isso de “para o bem da nação”.

Essas atitudes não são incomuns de serem vistas ao longo da nossa própria história, verídica e atual. Abusos de autoridade e o Estado que fecha os olhos quando alguém fraco e oprimido sofre algum dano é o foco principal de Larsson. Eu não esperava menos, pois ao final do segundo livro, estava clara que agora a batalha de Lisbeth e Mikael seria contra a própria Suécia (in)constitucional e corrupta.

Mas aí que vem o diferencial da obra: ao invés de condenar absolutamente tudo e todos, Larsson vai na contracorrente e consegue perceber que uma laranja podre não precisa, necessariamente, contaminar toda a árvore. Por isso, ele usa de figuras representativas do Estado sueco do livro para colaborar em ver também o lado de Lisbeth Salander, que sofreu pelos abusos das autoridades desde que veio ao mundo.

Blomkvist e Salander na adaptação cinematográfica sueca de A rainha do castelo de ar.

Com isso, Larsson consegue demonstrar que nem todo mundo que está no topo da cadeia autoritária está ali para proteger planos mirabolantes e prejudiciais ao indivíduo do Estado. Isso o caracteriza como um autor (e jornalista) bastante sensato. Penso que, caso a história fosse transcorrida de forma a condenar absolutamente todo o governo sueco, o autor estaria sendo não somente injusto, mas também deveras infantil.

Mas isso também se deve principalmente ao livro se passar no século XXI, enquanto os acontecimentos fatídicos que levariam a todo o problema em torno de Lisbeth acontecer remontam à Guerra Fria. Todos sabemos que essa época foi marcada pela espionagem e planos sigilosos. É nesse contexto do sigilo que Larsson embaseia suas críticas aos abusos estatais.

Durante todo o livro, somos brindados com palavras e termos como “sigiloso”, “segredo de estado”, “questão de segurança nacional” e outros. Com isso, Larsson consegue causar no leitor um sentimento misto (ao menos em mim): é compreensível haverem questões sigilosas de Estado, principalmente na época da Guerra Fria, mas ao mesmo tempo isso é extramente enojante, principalmente porque, por causa desse tipo de atitude, alguém está sendo prejudicado. No caso é Lisbeth Salander, a personagem principal do segundo e terceiro livros, que aprendemos a amar, mesmo com seu jeito peculiar (e não retardado) de ser.

Com isso me ponho a pensar: quantas pessoas são prejudicadas devido a essas coisas sigilosas ainda hoje? Quantas pessoas não sofrem abuso de estado? Como historiador, sei que há um tempo para essas informações serem liberadas para o povo em geral, que é cinquenta anos. Esse é o diferencial de Larsson: com sua ficção, consegue nos colocar para pensar em questões extremamente atuais e A rainha do castelo de ar funciona bastante como um livro de história também, pois muitos fatos da Suécia são liberados, ao passo que também históricos das instituições mencionadas também são detalhados (talvez com um bom tanto de fantasia, afinal, é uma ficção).

O terceiro livro da série é, por tudo isso, bastante lento, arrastado e até mesmo repetitivo. Por haver muitas provas e detalhes a serem descobertos, seja por Blomkvist, Salander ou qualquer outro membro envolvido na investigação, quando parece que o livro vai começar a engrenar de vez e vermos a luz no fim do túnel, tudo pára novamente pois a investigação fica travada por algum outro problema.

Mas não se engane: A rainha do castelo de ar está longe de ser uma leitura chata e penosa. Essa lentidão consegue nos proporcionar uma reflexão aprofundada do tema. Acredito que foi o livro em que mais pensei sobre, e com mais calma. Diferentemente da raiva para com os homens que violentam mulheres em Os homens que não amavam as mulheres, aqui encontramos um Larsson mais calmo, mas não menos denunciador: os crimes que ele denuncia são graves, em diversos âmbitos, inclusive da incapacidade da polícia de proteger o cidadão.

O foco da denúncia, no final das contas, são as instituições de Estado, onde todas podem ser coercitivas e nocivas, caso não olhem para o indivíduo e repensem seus atos. Como a arrogância costuma imperar nos doutores do alto de suas cadeiras autoritárias, normalmente esse indivíduo é pisoteado. É o caso de Salander, pisoteada desde o início de sua vida.

A importância da imprensa para esse tipo de denúncia é exaltado durante todo o livro também. Larsson era um jornalista, e A rainha no castelo de ar soa como um ode à sua profissão e fica claro que o Blomkvist jornalista é o alter ego do autor nesse ponto: se há algo para denunciar, a imprensa jamais deve se omitir. E Mikael jamais se omitiria, desde que possa provar tudo o que disse. Inclusive correndo risco de vida, a fibra e coragem do jornalista deve prevalecer, sempre buscando divulgar a verdade à população, sobre o que quer que seja.

A rainha no castelo de ar, por mais lento que seja, apresenta questões contundentes e torna a trilogia Millennium certamente obrigatória para qualquer leitor interessado em uma leitura provocativa e de caráter denunciador, além do que o livro possui o melhor final de todos da série, dá uma sensação realmente de “fim”. Um brinde a Stieg Larsson, um dos melhores autores e mais corajosos autores que já tive o prazer de ler.

Nota final: 4 estrelas (em um total de 5)