Skip navigation.

Kitty's Corner

The girl who played with Fire ~ Pigen der legede med ilden

,

I went to see a movie I've been waiting to hit the cinemas for a while, namely "The Girl who played with Fire". The film is the second of a trilogy; I reviewed the first film, Men who hate women, earlier this year. I gave it 5 stars out of 6.

The Girl who played with fire takes over where the first film ended. Lisbeth Salander, a small, tattooed, pierced hackergirl suddenly finds herself wanted for 3 murders, that she didn't commit. Some bad guys that are into trafficking and abusing of east European and Russian girls, drug dealing and lots of other scary stuff is paid by some of really bad guys to get rid of her.

Mikael Blomqvist, the journalist whose life she saved in the first movie, is trying to help. He is involved because two of the persons who were murdered was actually journalists, and writing about trafficking for his magazine.

Let me say it like this: People who didn't either read the books or saw the first film doesn't need to spend money on this movie. The plot is too weak, and assumes that you know what the first movie was about. There's not much "catching up" for newcomers. The movie uses way too little time on the interesting subject trafficking can be - it would be easy to spend more time on this topic!

The interaction between the two main characters were almost non existing - and that is a mistake in my opinion. The sullen goth hacker girl looses her charm when she doesn't have the journalist to play up to. And the journalist is just plain boring without her.

:star::star::star: out of 6.

(PS. The last part of the trilogy is planned to hit the cinemas in November. I loved the book, but I'm afraid the movie is just as disappointing as this one. awww)

What is text messages for??Movie wannabees

Comments

Furie 26. September 2009, 06:23

That's a shame. They just concentrating on the action and hoping fans of the book will rush online and declare it "teh shitz!"? It sounds more like the book has a delicate interplay between the two different main characters that got lost somewhere in the scriptwriting process. I hate when that happens. It turned one of my favourite books from a modern fantasy murder mystery into a slasher film. :irked:

Zaphira 26. September 2009, 07:39

The book (or all three of the books) are really good, and the second book treated the trafficking subject really good. It told more about the kingpins in the business, and lots more about the girls too. There were two sex scenes in the movie, that weren't that explicit in the book, and I got the thought that it was there "for the audience" - I hate that. :irked:

Spaggyj 26. September 2009, 07:39

I hate when movie producers change the plot of the book(s) they're basing the stuff on in the first place :irked:

Cois 26. September 2009, 11:13

Is the book translated to english?

Zaphira 26. September 2009, 13:00

@ Kimmie ~ Me too. And even though I know that producers can never make the movie exactly like the book, I hate it when they leave what I think as essential things. :mad:

@ Cois ~ Yes, at least the first two of the trilogy (I think the third one is on the way). The books are really good. The first one is The Girl with the Dragon tattoo in English. The second book is the best of the three IMHO, but don't skip the first one. :up:

ellinidata 26. September 2009, 13:31

three stars is better than two p: thanks for the warning !

have an awesome Saturday evening!

Zaphira 26. September 2009, 13:36

Haha yeah, and two is better than one. P:

Thank you so much - I return all the good wishes. :happy:

Cois 26. September 2009, 15:35

Ah I know it! p: ok I know where to get it.. :whistle:

flamingo-rinse 26. September 2009, 18:45

Ever seen a movie based on a book, that was actually better than the book?? :interested:

Zaphira 26. September 2009, 19:24

Only one - and that was "Kite Runner". I liked the movie, but the book really disappointed me. I don't think it was written very well.
Have you? :curious:

flamingo-rinse 26. September 2009, 19:36

Hmmm - I'm thinking about that (but excuse me for a while, because I'm distracted right now...:smile: ) I think I have, just trying to recall what one it is...

Zaphira 26. September 2009, 19:37

Sure, just take your time. :smile:

Furie 26. September 2009, 21:47

The only movie I've seen that was better than the book was Terminator 2. :o: The book went into less detail about the motivations of the characters than the action film did. :rolleyes: In case you're wondering, this was back in the days when movies spent years coming to video, I missed it at the cinema and the library had a copy. :left:

Minenow 26. September 2009, 22:08

Sounds worth a watch. :yes: I'd absolutely positively most definitely have to watch the first one first.

I cannot do films (or books) out of order. It goes against something deeply ingrained within me.

Dacotah 26. September 2009, 23:46

awww

flamingo-rinse 27. September 2009, 04:15

For my money, 'Dark Star' was quite a bit better than the book...and I thought that the visualisations actually made '2001 - A Space Oddesy' better than the book, too....*still thinking about it* :smile:

rose-marie 27. September 2009, 19:06

Interesting review. We had movie night at work this week, and this was one of the movies we could choose to see. Those who saw it liked it better than the first one. I still have to see it, though... :wink:

Originally posted by flamingo-rinse:

Ever seen a movie based on a book, that was actually better than the book?? :interested:

Two words: The Shining. Oh, and some more words: The Shawshank Redemption. And I think I'll throw in The Godfather too. :D

Furie 27. September 2009, 19:32

The Shining is the exception, the one thing that plays the trifecta of media quality backwards to the normal. The book is okay, the movie is better and the TV mini-series is even better than that, working in some things that the movie left out but the book had in. Still, the TV series doesn't have Jack...

garlingmatthews 28. September 2009, 11:59

I liked the first book best. Films two and three weren't intended for cinema release. They didn't interact much in the book either, did they?

Mik; Interview with the Vampire. Great film, not great book. 2001. Same.

Zaphira 1. October 2009, 18:20

I'll start reading that again soon-ish. I think I'll have to go and see the movie in November, when it's released. And no, number two and three weren't intended for the cinemas. Next year they'll come out on DVD, in a "TV release", like it was meant to be from the beginning. :up:

How to use Quote function:

  1. Select some text
  2. Click on the Quote link

Write a comment

Comment
(BBcode and HTML is turned off for anonymous user comments.)

If you can't read the words, press the small reload icon.


Smilies