I couldn't find much to like about this film, the cinematography was poor / borderline amateurish, the acting was mixed, ALL the themes were depressing (i could forgive this i guess), i had no interest in discovering 'who dunnit' as it felt like there was no engagement with the viewer, the lighting made the sets seem staged, plus a lot more.

I thought the use of sexual violence was interesting but felt it had little to do with the plot - i have not read the book so can't comment on its relevance. The 'dragon tattoo girl' seemed pathetic in these situations and was hoping she'd stick up for herself sooner as her character seemed to suggest she would.

Ended up playing Carcassonne half-way through with a friend as we both felt the movie wasn't really going anywhere (i lost).… Expand

If you have seen the original, and I recommend it very highly you will find this American remake laughable. While it is loudly distracting with bass heavy music, and a highly expensive overdone opening, it is never so disappointing as when they take a strong representation of blind justice and insult you by rewriting her as subservient and submissive in order to actually appeal to you as a watcher. As if the book's and original film's version of this character's character were too impossible to grasp. It is a Disneyland version of a very good book and original film Thpppp. Big fat raspberry. A visual 8, a storyline 1.… Expand

Itâ

Pointless remake. lamest part is the original swedish version is actually far better than this thing. I like the original trilogy, this isn't ''bad'' but I feel ripped off... why should I pay 10 bucks on theather to watch a movie I already own on Blu Ray at home, which can be watched over nine thousand times with infinite peeps for only 15 bucks.

I'll reiterate what others have said: this is a totally unnecessary remake of a much better Swedish film. Daniel Craig is a bore, the girl is merely adequate and this version is nowhere near as creepy as the Swedish version, which is available via streaming on Netflix. Director Fincher did much better in this genre with Se7en and Zodiac. Skip it!

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Walking into that movie theater, I did not know what to expect. As I haven't read the books nor seen the Swedish adaption, I had nothing to base an opinion on prior to watching it, and frankly, I'm glad that was so.
The movie isn't all bad. The actors are well-cast and interesting. However, the majority of them have this weird accent (not sounding a bit Swedish at all). The storyline has several plotholes and during the first 30 minutes or so you're bombarded with all these names. And trust me, it gets confusing. For two and a half-hours later the part-time poor story just keeps on going at a somewhat sluggish pace and when you think it's over - there's this bizarre "ending" which easily could have been cut. The thing that annoyed me the most, however, is that during a scene where Michael Blomkvist frantically looks for clues in Swedish newspapers, the paper "Göteborgsposten" is misspelled. Irritating indeed. Furthermore, the movie just supports the Swedish stereotypes (that we're all pale, introverted and cold) as well as implying that Sweden is practically the North Pole and that is constantly snows. Another thing that I found bizarre was that in all the obvious Apple product placement (super-obvious, you can't miss it), whenever someone was using a MacBook, they'd always have the keyboard backlit at the highest setting - even in broad daylight. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo deserves a weak 3.… Expand

I think the Fincher film is a reasonable effort but I found an interesting analysis of the original Swedish version at www.4thdimensionfilms.wordpress.com.

It is a more succinct review.

Edeltraud Dec 25, 2011 10 This may be an obnoxious observation, but if one of the themes is female empowerment why isn't the name of the movie "the woman with the dragon tattoo". Lis is in her 20's and an independent person ( despite guardianship). Clearly, she is exploited by the author and not respected as an adult.

do you want to be entertained? then don't see this movie. do you want to think? don't see this movie. the Acting: it was good. everyone was believable The music: bad. It was used so little that when it was used I went "oh music, maybe something will happen now" and it did every time. the Plot: the movie is about a guy doing research. I have not read the books but I suspect they are about the girl with the dragon tatoo. the movie is not about her. It feels like it should be but it is about Daniel Craig and he does do anything but research the entire movie.

there are 3 tense moments in the movie. they are not exciting and they play out exactly as would be expected. The reaction of the theatre was discomfort. everyone distracted themselves by talking to each other during these sense. they distract from the movie not add to it. which doesn't work when those scenes are all that happens during the 2.5h film… Expand

The movie that didn't need to be made. I agree with the reviewers who've said that this movie is a poor clone. Rooney Mara (sorry, I'm sure I'll like you in your next movie-- as long as it's not as Lisbeth) just made me wince; every scene she was expected to improve on Noomi Rapace's performance -- a fools errand. Daniel Craig just looked silly with his glasses hanging off his face, trying his best to look bookishly smart. I like both these actors, but the original set the bar; why mess with something that worked just fine? (Well, the obvious answer is that you can make money just by producing an English version of this popular work; never mind if it's artistically a bad choice.) As Dr. Evil told his (not so evil) son Scotty; "You're semi-evil. You're quasi-evil. You're the margarine of evil. You're the Diet Coke of evil. Just one calorie, not evil enough." That's how I felt after seeing this; the real deal was already made.… Expand

The only people rating this movie over 40% are those that have not seen the Swedish version. Do yourself a favor and watch that one rather than this crappy version.

I joined Metacritic to comment on this film. Count on Hollywood to botch a genuine classic - the Swedish original. I would have given it a lower rating except that people who have not either read the book(s) or seen the previous version(s) might like David Fincher's current flick. HOWEVER (where do I start), the current cast is OK, but not up to comparison - especially Fincher's Rooney Mara as super-sleuth Lisbeth Salandar vs. the amazing portrayal by Swedish actress, Noomi Rapace. And the relationship between LS and her male counterpart, Mikael Blomkvist, seemed pretty superficial - not the intense mysterious personality of the original heroine. All that aside, here are my biggest beefs with the plot: (1) the court-appointed guardian of Lisbeth, Nils Bjurman, was cast showing a soft side - totally in contrast to the evil, sadistic villain we grew to hate in the book. (2) In the rape revenge scene, how was the tied-up Nils Bjurman supposed to use the wire cutters left him by Lisbeth to free himself - with his knees? (3) Why does the ultra-careful, think-of-everything Lisbeth toss her jewelry in a sink and blond wig out the train window, exposing herself to capture after you know what (if you read the book)? And finally, (4) the ending - since Fincher ignored the actual story plot - didn't make any sense connecting the many, many dots in this incredibly intriguing story. If you really want to see a better version, see the original on DVD - either sub-titled or with English dubbing (which wasn't bad). I'm glad I have all three Swedish films in my library - absolute classics! But pass on Hollywood's unfortunate flop.… Expand

I was really disappointed by Fincher's remake. It pales in comparison to the Swedish version. I guess it would be acceptable if you haven't already been spoiled by the superiority of the original.

This film is utterly unsatisfying.
Not even slightly entertaining, some of the performances were utterly laughable, and the script was horrifyingly bad.

I will tell you that I didn't read the book so I cannot make any comparison with the movie. The movie though is totally disappointing: bad acting, slow pace, annoying and totally unjustified sex scenes... Also I'm wondering why did they need to remake an already boring swedish movie with british and american actors playing swedish characters?

I approached the Tattooed Girl phenomena with a rare privilege: first I saw the 6 episode original swedish Millennium miniseries that inspired Fincher et al. And like so many I was completely absorbed by this girl and basically the whole cast. The story really comes together and the center is the Millennium magazine. So why did the Americans have to do a remake? Mara doesn't add a single bit to Rapace's excellent portrayal of the disturbed heroin and an oscar nomination to boot? Does Craig make a better Blomkvist? No. Perhaps the bleak winter up in northern sweden was better represented (the series shows a climactic perfect sweden which is quite laughable). I won't be holding my breath to see part 2 and 3 which are in the works because they already exist: you just have to read the subtitles (they really do speak swedish there don't they...)… Expand

Too much un-needed explicit sex, and rape scenes if it weren't for the gratuitous sex scenes it would have been an enjoyable movie. The plot was good, acting was good. Had to fast forward many scenes, especially the rape scene and the oral sex scene. I don't know why they choose to put the trash in this movie.

Holy overrated dog sh*t batman!!! I don't get it!! I sat through the first 55 minutes of this excruciatingly, boring and emotionless crap. What movie did all these people see??? I know professional critics get paid off by the studios to give good reviews but do users also get money??? As of now there are 312 positive reviews for this lame movie? I need some cash so please give me the name and number of the studio head that paid all of you off to give this atrocity positive reviews. Everyone out there, SAVE YOUR MONEY AND TIME!!! AWFUL!!!… Expand