The Girl Who Played With Fire vs. The Girl Who Played With Fire

since i last posted about Lisbeth vs. Lisbeth in celluloid, i’ve of course read all the books. so this is Book vs. Swedish film version of Fire- actually, just advice to Fincher when he tackles it:

1. no need for the graphic lesbian sex, it’s gratuitous considering how much plot simplification and condensation is done to make this fit in the parameters of film.

2.i liked that there was an absent Lisbeth during the entire sequence of events surrounding the murders, i liked being confused and not understanding her involvement if any. keep that. i never once questioned her innocence or connections in this film, and i think its largest weakness is the rapidity in which the catalyst for the entire story is treated. this should be a huge KABAM! instead of a small plot point.

3. cast the big dude from Legion and The DaVinci Code (Paul Bettany) as Lisbeth’s half-brother. he’d be perfect.

i’m only halfway through the film, now. i may be back with more advice, Mr. Fincher. Thanks for asking.

 

EDIT: you know what, nevermind. just leave it alone. this is Hannibal to Silence of the Lambs - half the characters, oversimplified plot, and the cripple was a HUGE disappointment. Zalachenko’s bad scar make-up effects were as disappointing as Mason Verger/Gary Oldman in a moving chair instead of bedridden and without eyelids. stay away, Mr. Fincher and Miss Mara. your remake was lovely, but take the rest of the Swedish trilogy movies (and the elimination of Margot Verger) as a cautionary tale…

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo VS. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

yes, yes, i realize everyone’s already done this, and most are more well-informed since i haven’t even read the book – but i don’t really want to talk about Rooney Mara’s ass or Daniel Craig’s inability to seem vulnerable when judging the American version against the Swedish version.

just want to talk about Lisbeths. just want to talk about Noomi Rapace vs. Rooney Mara. just want to talk about something very, very different in these two performances that i haven’t seen mentioned yet (and if it’s all over the place and i’m regurgitating, forgive me):

Noomi Rapace’s Lisbeth: sociopath

Rooney Mara’s Lisbeth: psychopath

both women play the role admirably, but the interpretations are sooo different. Rapace’s Lisbeth is a coiled snake – a tightly wound ball of rage and vulnerability and intelligence. NEVER does she seem to be anything other than in complete control and completely aware of what she’s doing, be it testing her attraction/feelings for her male companion or carving a bloody tattoo in a rapist’s chest. there’s never a snap or a click when you feel she’s floated away and given in to her rage and it is driving her.

The opposite is true of Rooney Mara – in the same scenes (mainly the violent ones, of course) Mara goes distinctly different behind the eyes and seems absolutely consumed. She’s a different Lisbeth when she commits these acts, she is Rage, she is Not There. you see the blink and suddenly smart and guarded Lisbeth has become the creature that carves names on people’s chests and asks permission to kill, because she’s incapable of making such a decison.

for this, i respect Rapace’s performance, as well as her Lisbeth, more than Mara’s. I don’t know if it’s an American preference – we want people (especially a female we want to like) to lose it before they do horrifying things so we don’t have to blame them? i don’t know.

it’s Lecter vs. Gumb for me – the Aware will always be more compelling.