I liked The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo well enough. I mean the movie, not the book; I haven't read any of the books. I gotta admit that I don't entirely get Noomi Rapace as an It Girl that must be snatched up and thrust at American audiences though - she was good enough, I suppose? She's no Carice Van Houten that's for sure (where have you gone Carice?!?) Anyway it never really lit my ass on fire, but unlike say Twilight I do feel this strange need to at least nominally keep up with the Lisbeth Salander cultural steamroller so I went ahead and watched The Girl Who Played With Fire, and oh my god it bored me to death. Except for Paolo Roberto, real-life boxer playing himself in the movie, who's sort of what Tom Hardy might look like if Tom Hardy got punched in the face a bunch. Or a bunch more, I guess. In a sexy way, I mean.
He didn't bore me anyway. But beyond swollen-faced boxers in their briefs this post has another point - should I bother seeing The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest after this, or should I just wait for David Fincher to take these on? The completeist in me figures I should but goddamn this movie bored me. Anyway I ask you!
.
.
Posts
7 comments:
Having seen "Hornet's Nest" just a few weeks ago, I can say that No, you shouldn't bother.
I'm a HUGE fan of the books, and enjoyed the first two movie adaptations.
But the third movie is so disjointed. Unlike the first two where the cuts/changes made for the film make sense, it was pretty clear that they didn't know what to do with the third book's story.
I want to blame this on Daniel Andersson who took over as director for the second and third films but I'm not sure he should shoulder all of the blame.
I'm stoked about Fincher doing American versions. Especially knowing that Daniel Craig will be heating up the screen as Blomkvist.
Every time the movies have shown Nyqvist naked - which once is more than enough, for real - I've told myself that at least there's a moment where Fincher can get Daniel Craig naked coming up.
You're welcome:
1) http://gfx.aftonbladet-cdn.se/multimedia/archive/00040/k_nde_sig_f_r_gr__40122w.jpg
2) http://blogs.sweden.se/staffblog/tag/paolo-roberto/
3) http://ss11i01.stream.ip-only.net/images/blog/images/entries/73/53/60/110244/ac3765c528452f01
4) http://gfx.aftonbladet-cdn.se/multimedia/archive/01162/Roberto_1162090w.jpg
TrG you rule.
Our reaction to this movie is frighteningly similar.
I thought TGWPwF had a languid pace. The re-union between TGw/DT and her Dad was unforgivably anti-climactic ... shot like a lesser Charlie's Angels episode.
But I googled the hell out of Paolo the minute I could get my fingers on a keyboard. He has that Klitschoesque euro-boxer sexiness.
Still recovering from the Jason Patric post.
I've got 'Fire' sitting here at home now but haven't watched it yet. I hope I'll like it, but I'm not optimistic. I gave the first one a B-.
Just a little FYI,
Paolo Roberto is a grade A homophobe who, among other things, was a spokesperson for a campaign against gay marriage by Sweden's answer to the National Organisation for Marriage.
Since then, though, he's been plastered on the cover of what is arguably Sweden's largest gay publication together with a Swedish (also straight) rapper in the context of "gay marriages we'd like to see" - in which he basically said that he's not against gay marriage, he's just REALLY FOR straight marriage.
He's also a raging anti-feminist so yeah, he's just swell.
Post a Comment