So, I just watched the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (the American version) and I didn't like it. Granted, I never got bored and it was really well photographed, but I can't shake the feeling that that was an incredible waste of time and a sense of shock that so many people like it. I had no idea what was going on until about the last thirty minutes. All of the investigation stuff was sifting through photos and names of people I had no reference point for, and basically the case hinged on two pictures that apparently had such an obvious correlation that two characters figured it out separately on their own.
But before this turns into a user review / rant and before the dozens of people shouting that the book / other movie were way better, there's one point of contention in this movie that bugged the hell out of me. There's about 15 to 20 minutes of this lengthy 2 hour 36 minute movie devoted to a detailed rape and revenge sequence. I have no idea why it's there, I don't know how it serves the plot, I don't know why it was as explicit as it was, and I don't know why people haven't called bullshit on it yet. For those who haven't seen it
So, how is she any less of a rapist than the guy who raped her? Theoretically, the guy could easily call the cops and they'd both go to jail for a really long time. Isn't rape categorically wrong and a crime no matter who commits it to who? Why does this beloved (from what I've seen online) character get let off the hook? One could argue that he "deserved" it or was "asking for it," but by definition, no one deserves or asks for rape. It's not possible. It feels pretty despicable and disgusting to paint that act of violence as justifiable, which I'm pretty sure this movie does. Maybe I'm weird and looking at it the wrong way, but it feels fucked up.
But before this turns into a user review / rant and before the dozens of people shouting that the book / other movie were way better, there's one point of contention in this movie that bugged the hell out of me. There's about 15 to 20 minutes of this lengthy 2 hour 36 minute movie devoted to a detailed rape and revenge sequence. I have no idea why it's there, I don't know how it serves the plot, I don't know why it was as explicit as it was, and I don't know why people haven't called bullshit on it yet. For those who haven't seen it
Lisbeth Salander is a computer hacker working for various companies under the table. She gets her money from a trust fund and dresses like a person who might do drugs or have trouble with the law. She has to go to "some guy" to declare her mentally competent and he precedes to ask her to perform oral sex on him to get her money. She agrees. Later, she goes to his apartment, where he handcuffs her to a bed, and as the movie makes sure to tell us, anally rapes her on screen. For some reason, the guy tries to be all nice and friendly afterwards like he doesn't know what he just did. She plans for a little bit and goes back to his apartment. He tries to "apologize" or something and she tasers him. She then handcuffs him, anally rapes him with a glass dildo, and says that she'll blackmail him with secret footage she took of the rape. Then, she tattoos "rapist pig" on his body.
So, how is she any less of a rapist than the guy who raped her? Theoretically, the guy could easily call the cops and they'd both go to jail for a really long time. Isn't rape categorically wrong and a crime no matter who commits it to who? Why does this beloved (from what I've seen online) character get let off the hook? One could argue that he "deserved" it or was "asking for it," but by definition, no one deserves or asks for rape. It's not possible. It feels pretty despicable and disgusting to paint that act of violence as justifiable, which I'm pretty sure this movie does. Maybe I'm weird and looking at it the wrong way, but it feels fucked up.
