The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo Movie Review
91The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo Movie
This movie is a suspense, mystery, thriller. Daniel Craig plays a writer who loses an important legal battle in the very first scenes of the movie. He accused a CEO of being a "criminal". The CEO then sued and won 600,000 Swedish kronas (about $87,000). He quits his post as co-editor of a newspaper, leaving behind his married female partner in editing as the new solo editor.
He takes a job writing the memoirs of a retired business man. This is a cover for his real investigation. The real purpose of his hire is to investigate the death of the business man's niece, Harriet. Harriet simply disappeared one day when she was just 16. Since then, someone has been mailing a Christmas gift every year to the business man. A dried wild flower on a canvas backing. This is the gift Harriet used to give to him every year.
While the story follows the writer, the scene cuts frequently back to another young woman, an investigator. She is a ward of the state, and receives money for her living expenses in this way. (Sweden is Socialist). Her case manager, with whom she was good friends, has a stroke. As a result, she gets a new case manager.
The viewer quickly discovers he is a pervert as he forces her to perform oral sex on him in his office. She needs money to replace a laptop destroyed in a mugging. The scene leaves little to the imagination: it is shown from the girl's back as she moves up and down in front of the case manager, a large, fat man.
Now, I should have walked out right then. This is not something I want to see. I understand developing the story. These things happen at the hand of evil people in the world. Evil is real. I get that. But, the art of film has many ways of showing such things. I should have anticipated that the movie was produced by strange persons. The opening is a loud metal rock score with a bizarre conflux of people being coated in some slick black liquid. It pours from their lips, over their heads, merges them together, and rips them as they come apart. One grows wings, black wings, like a dark angel. A single match is thrown, igniting and melting at least one person down to the skull. Hands come from behind, binding a mouth and ripping apart. insects emerge in a cloud from a black mouth. All of this is done in shades of black. And, this bizarre, irrelevent opening drolls on and on. It may have been five full minutes or more. At the end of it, several people could be heard saying in indignation, "What was that?!?"
We Walked Out
Our movie started at 2:10 (previews, anyhow). About an hour into the actual movie, the writer is beginning to just put together some notes on Harriet. The girl with the dragon tattoo, however, quickly advances from fellatio to being raped.
The entire scene is shown. How the man binds her, how he tears off her clothes, parts of her nakedness, are all shown. As he climbs on top of her, unrolling a condom, he says, "I forgot to ask you if you like anal sex." At this, my wife and I looked at each other and said, "Let's walk out."
The manager agreed to give us tickets for a later show. At first we accepted. But, when he returned with the comp tickets, I told him I wanted the studio to know we walked out. This required a cash refund, which we received.
If, like me, you do not want to see bizarre videos of black-oil devil angels, too much detail in forced oral sex, and an anal rape, walk out. The movie industry needs to know: We do not want garbage. We want movies like Courageous. Give us what we want, or we will stop going.
Every person needs to start doing this:
1. Walk out of movies that promote or blatantly show what you disagree with or do not want to see. This often means walking out in the second half of the movie, after they have you hooked, too curious to see the conclusion to walk out.
2. Encourage others to walk out and to likewise teach others to walk out.
What others have to say about this movie:
I found an interesting site, with comments both for and against. Another commenter, "Marky Mark" had basically the same thoughts as my wife and I.
I also spoke with an in-law living in Sweden. There, he tells me, the movie ran under the title "Men Who Hate Women". In Sweden, it is illegal to speak against homosexuality in public. Two years ago, there for a conference, my wife said something using the word "homosexuality." A man from the adjacent coffee shop table politely leaned over and whispered, "You can be arrested here for that."
I think most of the commenters to this hub pages review do not yet realize that most, if not all, movies are one of just two things: advertisement or socialization. The attack on men is in full operation. This movie is not so much to bring concern for rape, as some state here. It is to reflect negatively on men.
Author of the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
When I searched for the author of this violent, anti-male movie, I was not at all surprised to find that he was a leader of a communist group in Sweden (read: anti-freedom- has communism ever been anything other?). He edited a Trotsky publication.
Read the rest about Stieg Larsson here: Stieg Larsson
vote upvote downshareprintflag
- Useful (2)
- Funny (1)
- Awesome (2)
- Beautiful
- Interesting (2)
CommentsLoading...
I am shocked at your description. I have promoted this book a lot, not realising it had those scenes in it. I promote bestsellers; I cannot possibly read all the books but this is one movie I would have liked to have seen, but will cross off the list now. Thanks for telling us what was in it. Not my cup of tea!
I am posting the day after the film. I woke at the crack of dawn today (hours before usual). That scene was tormenting me. All I could do was go pray against sexual molestation, sexual abuse, and rape.
After we walked out, my wife told me that as the scene played, the Holy Spirit told her that the enemy intentionally showed this scene in order to spread a spirit of rape. The same notion had entered my mind, and we confirmed each others' thoughts. Though most will not accept it: an evil force just gave ideas to those with power over others that they can force fellatio, and rape those under their charge. There should be a law requiring them to notify the audience that there is a graphic scene of rape. Even with that, the screaming of the girl in the movie was terrible.
The fact that such scenes in a movie are so disturbing and evoke feelings of utter sickness in the audience can only be a good thing, because it showed it as something disgusting, damaging and repulsive and utterly horrific and traumatic. This is as such things should be shown. Movies that trivialize or glorify such things are far more damaging but far less controversial as they don't make the audience squirm. Any normal person will be holding back tears in certain parts of this film, and if scenes of violence and rape dont evoke such emotions the film maker is doing something wrong and making a far more damaging film
Hmmm, a personal relationship with a holy spirit that divides good from evil (as if good and evil have a separate source)--yet fails to have the capacity to understand mentally disturbed people do horrific acts, albeit these horrific acts do not make them, as human beings, evil.
Is this really how a (or the) holy spirit understands the human condition?
If "all" is ultimately from the same source (i.e., God, Gawd, Brahma, the Divine, Allah, "Nature"), then to judge a human being as good or bad without making a distinction between their fundamental nature as a "speck of the divine" and their actions based upon a misunderstanding of their own divine nature, well, then maybe such a judgement only speaks to the limitations of the individual who passes such judgements.
Mind you, I am not free from the capacity to judge, nor wish ill will upon another. And that is exactly what I was so impressed by in the movie: the ability to be taken on a ride and observe my own human reactions to the drama on the screen.
My hunch is the Man from Modesto and his wife weeped while watching "Passion of the Christ." My question is why could you not share the same tears for Lisbeth in "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo?" My hunch, after reading a little bit about this fellow named Jesus, is Jesus might ask the same question.
David & Wholly Spirit:
I understand your point: the director produces a scene which emoted the reaction he intended. He wants to portray that in society, violent acts of rape happen.
I have this to ask you: Do you not know ANYONE who has ever been raped, molested, suffered from incest? Statistics: I just looked up some stats: using international numbers from the UN, Each year, about 20 women in 100,000 are reported as raped. (male rapes are not recorded, it seems). Estimates are the 95% of rapes are not reported. Using this crude math, about 1 in every 5 women will be raped by age 45. Most people have more than 5 females in their extended family.
So, no one needs to see as much as was shown in order to understand how violent a rape is. There is a a LOT a director can do to convey the type of rape, the extreme violence of it, and other factors.
I am equally upset by the violence depicted in war films, mobster films, etc. . .
If we as a species were to easily learn from our mistakes, then my hunch is we would not need to reminded of our capacity to so deeply hurt others. For many it is important to never forget the atrocities of the Holocaust, to be reminded of how people can behave without a conscience--hence, be reminded of our capacity to embrace and be embraced by one's conscience.
As a therapist who for more than thirty years has worked with rape victims, both male and female, and and has close friends who have suffered at the hands of violent offenders, the portrayal of the violent acts in the film under discussion barely allude to the reality of such an event.
Keep on praying Man from Modesto. No matter one's faith, prayer/meditation can help to align one with a greater capacity to love.
Why shouldn't they show the scene? Why should they not show it? Some things, although people do not agree with them, should be seen, just to prove how evil they are. David Fincher, the director, does this in many of his films that I've seen. Nothing rape-wise, but that's because some people consider that to be a taboo in film. People in movies nowadays are usually fine with the most horrendous things, such as fights, TORTURE, and MURDER, completely, or mostly on screen, and yet people still find that on screen rape is simply not allowed.
Yes, I do realize that it is a horrible thing. I'm not saying anything similar to it. What I am saying, is give movies a chance. That scene is actually extremely short. I think it was less than thirty seconds, although I wasn't exactly timing it as I watched.
Try watching it again, and you may change your mind about it. I'm now tempted to write my own review of this movie. Thank you for this Hub, despite what my comment may imply. It was very detailed, and all good reasoning. This is simply my reply, trying to convince you to watch this movie. It is extremely good, in my opinion.
(Also, as a note, it does say in the MPAA rating the things inside the movie... not sure if you said it, or another commenter...)
Greg,
Several years ago, a tv special ran. It was the story of a girl who was a "cutter." Incidents of cutting increased three-fold after the movie. Still, another cutter story ran a few years later. Today, "cutting" is a common term.
While we were watching the scene, my wife and I BOTH intuitively (by the Holy Spirit) understood that the purpose of the scene was to introduce a spirit of rape, control, and abuse of power into viewers.
After Vietnam, the Army diagnosed a major problem: men won't shoot other men. Only 10% of soldiers fired their weapons. To desensitize them, targets were made in the silhouette of humans. Today, close to 90% fire their weapons.
A visual image DOES desensitize the innate respect of humanity we are all born with. And, spirits do transfer by what is seen with the eyes. It enters into the mind, and has a chance to enter the heart from there.
Thank you for contributing a well-thought-out comment.
Man from Modesto,
I assume that by cutting, you mean by cutting themselves to relieve stress, or whatever? That's a random thought, me wondering.
I do realize that there are some things, visual, like the cutting, or the human silhouettes, that desensitize people. However, I do not believe that is the case in this movie.
I do know a rape victim personally. However, I know many who do not. I haven't asked any of them. I know this, because I've heard someone make a joke about rape around them, and most of them laughed or smiled, them not understanding it. Please, don't think less of them. People that don't truly understand something are impossible to judge about the subject, unless they try.
I tell you this, because I believe that after seeing this movie, this particular scene, they, like many others, will no longer see it as something to joke about. They will see it as something that happens. Something that people experience.
There will probably be those sick few who see that scene, and embrace it, because it gives them a hard-on. But that happens with most everything, unfortunately.
What I'm trying to say here is that it will NOT 'desensitize the innate respect of humanity we are all born with.'
Your writing is truly great, and interesting to read, PLEASE do not get me wrong here, with anything.
Greg
Michael,
I did not allow your comment. Please provide worthy reading. -MFM
I did not see the movie. New to Hub pages, have not published a Hub yet. But I do plan to publish a Poem by my mother, about a dragon Tattoo.
This movie is sick..too much violence and rapes and also the brutal cutting up of a cat...who needs to watch such violence..I walked out too...got my money back.
I am going to start right off the bat with saying I do not agree with your opinion. First, you say this movie is horrible because of how it portrays oral sex and rape, however these things happen in our society and the does not PROMOTE it, in fact it causes a greater understanding of it. You said yourself that the scene was horrible. So obviously the film was showing how bad these thing are instead of promoting it. Next, I understand if you can't handle these things but don't say something is demonic because you can't handle it. Even though you got a 'feeling' that it is, the most likely explanation is that your negative thoughts caused that feeling. Also, before you go to a movie, maybe check up on what it is about. Another thing is that it is rated R, it is rated this for a reason! Now you say this movie is to reflect negatively on men. Ok first you didn't watch the whole movie!!!!! So this is what happens: Martin is the killer, who tortures women and he tried to get Harriet to do it to but then she ran away. The Sweden film was had men in it because Martin and his Dad tortured women. Also men refers to a group of men, not all men. Next the book is one of the BEST books i have ever read. All of this stuff is in the book. The book has a great story, character development, and all the characteristics needed to make it a best seller. Sure, it has a few touchy subjects, but many books have that, this isn't a 'supernatural demon' book, it is a best seller that touches on touchy subjects within a story line. Becks out.
Bekah,
Thank you for your comments. Please read my comments above to Greg.
My wife and I both, each independent of the other, received- by the Holy Spirit -that the movie is actually inspired by demonic forces for the purpose of opening people to the same spirit.
Ideas enter the mind through the eyes and ears. From the mind, they can enter the heart. From the heart, all our actions come forth. This is why Jesus said that what enters the stomach does not defile, but what defiles is our actions, as these display what is in the heart.
I don't want to be disrespectful, but I have to disagree with you on the point that this movie is anti-male. They show quite a good percentage of the male characters in a good light.
In saying that, the movie did not do justice to the book, which was one hundred times better.
Again, I don't mean any disrespect.
Disagreement is not disrespect. Thank you for commenting. Which male characters were the positive role models? The corrupt CEO? The writer who made accusations without any court-defense-worthy evidence? The policeman who could not solve the case, and who missed putting together that multiple murders of women might be something bigger? The slovenly tech geek on government welfare? The social worker?
The best of all the men seemed to be the original social worker, who had a stroke on his birthday. He seemed to have a loving, caring, and personal relationship with the Dragon tattoo girl.
My point is not so much the attack on men, which can be effective despite showing some men in a positive light, but that demonic spirits ("ideas" for those who reject the existence of good and evil) can enter in by simply watching something.
In 1991, while I was an engineering student at San Jose State, a movie came out (Cape Fear, I think) in which a violent rape occurs. The attacker bit deeply into the face of the victim. A copy cat raped a few women in the environs of the campus- biting her face each time, and murdering them.
I suppose it's a matter of opinion. While the writer (not sure just how to spell his name... Bloonkficht?) made multiple accusations without any real proof, he was shown to be a good man who honestly cared about others, and tried his best to save/help the other characters in peril.
Ah, Cape Fear, I enjoyed that one. I agree that the scene you mention was extremely unpleasant, and while a small percentage of the people who watched it may have found it... "appealing" to do that to a fellow human being, it also shocked a lot of people into realizing that maybe they weren't taking sexual asault and rape quite seriously enough.
I recently re-watched it with a group of friends, some male, some female. Two of the males had to leave the room while that scene was playing because they'd seen it before and were so sickened by it that there was no way they were going to watch it a second time.
I agree with you that there is absolute filth walking amoung us, I think you need to keep in mind that most people are good, and aren't going to be converted into serial rapists/killers by a film.
Thanks for the civil tone-of-voice, by the way. Tolerance is rare on the internet.
I think the movie, The Girl With the Dragon Tatoo is anti-socialist because it shows the flaws of the state. This movie speaks for the individuals of this world who are not only not protected by any other human being or state, but abuse her via physical and political strength. This movie is highly individualistic in philosophical leaning, not socialistic.
It is unfortunate you walked out at the point you did. It is ironic that you believe that showing such a scene would possibly lead to copycat acts when later in the film it shows how certain bible quotes denoting murder and torture were used by the murderer as a source of inspiration.
I believe it is those that take the word of an old book and its fairy tales and hear voices ('holy spirits')in their head that are much more likely to let such a scene affect their moral judgements than any regular, sane person.
I am not amazed that the movie also took an opportunity to debase the Bible. Have you not yet wondered why the powers that be in this earth are so tolerant of anti-Christian slander and hatred?
I actually liked this movie a little bit, but the Swedish version was much better. Great job keep up the great work, voted Up, Useful, Awesome, and Interesting.
I can understand that you are from a nation where everything is censored so your reaction was just normal. However in my opinion good movie is a movie that brings up emotions.
When I saw this scene my first reaction was like "no way" did he really say that? And after that I felt disgusted. Therefore the scene had succeeded..to make me feel that way.
Movies should be realistic and these things should not be taboos. These things happen in the world a way more often than people realize. Of course it is always easy to close your eyes from it. I didn't really like your comment when you demanded people to act as you did simply because you didn't agree. It was your decision to go to see this film which was, as you know R-rated. In case you are a sensitive type or person I would suggest you not to watch R-rated films from now on.
Ummm...?: I 100% disagree with you. Some things ARE taboo, and should remain that way. The entire concept of anal sex is vulgar, unnatural act. Do you realize that most perverted things would NEVER be learned in society except that they are shown in movies?
It is a FACT that acts of violence increase after they are shown in movies: suicide, cutting, drug use, smoking, even particular methods of violent rape are KNOWN to produce an increase of those same actions.
Effectively, that movie has already increased the number of rapes and anal rapes that have occurred in every nation and region where it was shown.
Now, why did I go to see it? Easy: They always hide the perversion until later. The trailers do not hint at the content of the movie. It is only by independent reviews on the web that we are able to warn and defend each other.
I just found your post when performing a Google search to be absolute sure I want to see this movie. I have to say that I agree with you when it comes to every other movie except this one. I know I haven't seen it yet, but I read the book and I have read enough about the movie that I feel confident in my opinion. Here's why:
I started boycotting ANY movies that depict sexual molestation or rape after having had to suffer through the opening of Law Abiding Citizen. I feel that that movie (and many others: The Accused, Last House on the Left, A Time to Kill) go too far in their depiction of these acts. I often feel the scenes are shown for either shock value or to titillate the viewers, which is really disturbing. Also, I feel like it's becoming more common to show rape in movies, and, being a molestation victim myself and my sister a victim of rape, I get worried that (like with violence) showing rape in movies so much is going to desensitize us to it.
However, I get a totally different feel from Stieg Larsson and from the director of The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. I have read many an interview from the director saying that he hopes the violence is disturbing, because it should be - we SHOULD be moved to disgust when confronted with these acts. I believe this is exactly why Mr. Larsson chose to write the books. I like to think he was hoping that after reading his books, if anyone ever witnessed a gang rape again, they would be sure to do something about it, having been educated on how truly harrowing the consequences of such evil are.
So, after months of deliberating (and educating myself on the book and movie), I have decided I am going to see the movie. Tonight, actually. And I know it's a break in my boycott, but I feel it is a worthy one as I wholeheartedly support what I believe is the cause behind it - to educate. Plus, it's a damn good story otherwise, as well.
As a footnote, might I suggest researching every movie you choose to go see - at least by looking at what makes it rated R. It's a little irritating when people blame ignorance of the movie's plot on trailers, which are in their very nature NOT supposed to give anything important away. IMDB's Parental Guide describes all inappropriate action in movies from cussing all the way to violence in detail. It's a good resource to prevent a wasted night.
M,
Trailers frequently misdirect. I can't count the number of times I have gone to see a comedy only to learn it is a movie about how homosexuals are superior to heterosexuals. When a film is significantly about homosexuality, how is it justified to leave that out of trailers? And why does this information typically remain hidden until halfway or more through the movie.
The holy spirit talked to you??? No way....
Thatis the most stupid thing I have ever heard... Specialy when it says to you that a "evil spirit" of rape is willing to posses the audience.
Realize this is the real world dude: some people will go to see that movie only for those scenes you cry for.
And if someone is so impressed by the movie to go and rape some girl, then that someones has no own will, and may be completely insane and mentally retarded. That same person my go and crucify somebody if he/she sees Passion of the Christ...
And read the Bible. Angels and God may be very cruel...
Yes, the Holy Spirit of God speaks to those who are willing to listen. Angels only do what God directs them to do. God punishes those who rebel. He blesses those who love Him.
Which side of this would you like to be on?
Finding and inviting Jesus into your life also brings peace. I very much hope your life will take a turn for the better, and you will find love in many friends. Peace.
You should stick to watching PG movies, just because you didn't like it doesn't mean everyone else agrees and it doesn't make the movie bad, it's in the book and it has reason.
Peter, Thank you for this genius insight. You are correct, I HAD assumed that everyone else would not like it simply because I disliked it. I also had not considered that the author and director had any reasons for what they produced. Thank you so much.
I heard a lot about the movie and just want to reach out in complete support for your reaction and your warning. I never go see horror movies because even just seeing the trailors gives me a sense that demonic forces are welcomed through that gross medium into my space. I admire your tenacity and willingness to speak out about what you and your wife experienced, which reflects the spiritual reality of such a film. God bless you for your candidness and for protecting me, a woman, from exposure to trauma.
I actually find this review hilarious. The fact that you seem to think that this movie promotes rape just proves how ludicrous this post is. The very idea of the book was to show the disgusting nature of what the imbalance of power of those in situations like Lisbeth's.
Also the notion that you think that GWDT is 'anti-male' is laughable. The original title, Män som hatar kvinnor, men who hate women, means specific men who hate women, perhaps a better translation would be 'the me who hate women'. Harriet's uncle and Lisbeth's caregiver were men who hate women, there was nothing in the movie that gave the idea to me or any other person I knew that gave 'anti-male' vibes.
Also, by the way, Sweden is not socialist (perhaps the current government run by a Swedish centre-right wing party might show this). Sweden has privatised many, many more things than what they US has and in fact is seen as a role model for free market reform around the world, But hey they're also not the country swimming in debt.
The anti-homosexual-hate-speech laws are there for the same reason why the religious are protected in Sweden too. You have the right to believe in what you want so long as you do not infringe on another's right to live their life. Just like YOU don't want your right to live in a sheltered life infringed.
Jemppur92: Perhaps you need to put this in CULTURAL and historical perspective. By historical, I mean right-now history.
A group of powerful men are attempting to establish a new world order. These men want to control every bit of information that enters your head. One arm of this front is the attack on parents teaching children.
Their efforts include an attack on marriage, promotion of the "feminist movement", promoting the idea that homosexuals are disenfranchised because two men cannot marry one another, and graying the distinction between and women. They also plan to control all money by creating a global electronic money system using chips implanted into the hand or forehead.
Here are the global works. Sweden is at the forefront in these things: Sweden is currently proposing legislation to do away with all cash currency- and go all electronic.
Sweden has already made it illegal to SAY anything negative about homosexuals. You can bash Christians there, just not gays.
Sweden has also removed word meaning he/she, his/hers and other male/female words. Now they have just "it" neuter terms for both.
They are planning the same for America!
This film further creates division between men and women.
Why does the government and the 'powers that be' want to destroy family and control all the information to children (who will eventually, under their plan be state-owned)? A: Because they want to teach them that Satan is God, not the "God of Abraham".
I hope I have burst the bubble of your sheltered mind. You have been "socialized" as they call it. I call in mind and thought control. You are brainwashed.
Dakotah 5 months ago
I can understand your disgust, for that moment in the movie was utterly debilitating to watch, but there is a purpose behind showing such brutality. If I am correct, that portion of the movie was in the books. Every scene in a good movie has a purpose, this scene built a picture of the suffering and insanity that occurs in the world today. If you don't think rape and torture exist in this world, read a newspaper or a history book. It's real. I believe the director was trying to portray the life the girl had led, to properly describe the character to the audience. To clarify I'm not saying you shouldn't walk out of a movie if it offends you, but to call a movie garbage because you find it offensive is completely unjust. I found that movie's use of a bizarre soundtrack and visuals to properly "develop the feel" of the movie. This never was a story of justice and perfection, it is far from it. I believe that is what the movie was about.