i think the books go into a lot more of the nuance of lisbeth's character. she's not just a girl who had some bad relationships, she is someone who grew up with near constant abuse and instead of being helped, was subject to more abuse in the guise of treatment. so yeah, she is pretty fucked up. the movies kind of gloss over everything, the way movies pretty much have to in order to keep them from being 10 hours long.

i understand your objections, but i enjoyed the books a great deal. i liked the movies, too. as well as you can like a movie when you've already read the book.

I love the books. I don't love the movies because they don't have time to go into the psychology of each character, but I love the books. And I love what Stieg Larsson did with Lisbeth Salander's character.

How many movies are about highly intelligent women with disabilities who kick the system's ass. How many movies deal unapolegetically with Scandinavian collaborations with the nazis and anti-semitism, human trafficking and the government's implication in these matters, women with disabilities and sexual abuse?!?? I can't think of any.

I even like the books better seeing how it was written by a man because it means some guy did get oppression. He got it to a tee. This author was a ubiquitous conspiracy theorist. And he got that to a tee too.

Now if we're going to shit on a film that piles abuse onto women, let's talk about "A Serbian Film" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Serbian_Film). Cause THAT film is fucked up.

I'm with you , Lisa. The sexual violence in the first film didn't have to be quite so sensational to get its point across, did it? I hear from readers that the rape scene in the "Dragon Tattoo" book is even worse. Salander kicks ass, yes, but at what cost? Does the original title of "Men Who Hate Women" and Larsson's stated feminism make this stuff okay?

@ina ina, holy crap. I really wish I hadn't read that link. Although I agree with the points you've raised. I have read the first two books in the Millenium series, and thouroughly enjoyed both, I'm working up to get stuck into the third text. I do wish The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo had been published under it's original title, Men Who Hate Women, as it seems far more appropriate, although less marketable I'm sure.

I did. And I do think it's unfortunate to depict women in crisis. But I love how this character copes with her crisis and disability and I love how the book explains exactly how the system failed her, at ever echelon. The book isn't about one woman being raped (well it's a several), it's about oppression being systemic. Much like it is in Osama. Maybe that's what's missing from the movie. But then it would have been too long.

I will say this though, the rape scene in the 1st movie is way too long. And there are way less "Lisbeth in crisis" scenes in the books than there are in the movies.

You should read the books, especially the third book (which is available in the U.S. hardcover copy already). The third book [Spoiler Warning] has a huge cast of great, smart, strong characters, male and female, who help Lisbeth out. I agree with ina ina that the books are about oppression being systematic, and the third book describes the responsibility of both men and women to put a stop to it. But even in the end, every character in the books is flawed in some way, which makes me like them even more. We're striving for a better society and to better ourselves, but we haven't gotten there yet.

Part of the "problem" is that this book was written by a man and, because of that, the descriptiveness of his writing on behalf of an abused woman is going to come under fire. However, in these books, it's obvious how much Stieg Larsson cares about women. It's also obvious how strongly he feels about the way women are treated - see abused - in Sweden, regardless of their standing. There is no way that a movie can go into that much detail without becoming mundane. So, in order to showcase the problem, they make it as deplorable as possible to get the point across. Is it right? No, maybe not. But it made you FEEL something. The same way the books made everyone who loved them - including myself - feel something.

I found the film to be very anti-feminist (haven't read the books). My primary complaint is that her character is SUCH a male fantasy. For instance, it is established early in the film that she is a lesbian, by way of a nicely understated and naturalistic scene. So why in god's name does she later initiate a sexual relationship with Blomkvist's character out of nowhere?! It was utterly gratuitous. Yes, I know that sexuality is a spectrum, etc. etc., but it seemed to me that the author found it very titillating that the forty-something male protagonist (with whom the author obviously identified) would be aggressively seduced by a very sexy, rather dangerous twenty-something tech genius. If it weren't for this issue, I wouldn't be so suspicious about the rape and assault perpetrated on her character. Ultimately I interpreted it as the author posing as a pro-woman progressive, while actually having deep-seated misogynist tendencies.

Really, to understand every thread of the story you need to read the books. I loved the trilogy, and am waiting to see the movies once they are all out. The other fact that hasn't been taken into account is that everything takes place in Sweden, not puritanical America, and every character has different sexual tendencies described well enough that we understand how everyone looks at sex in their own way. Some characters are experimental, others are unable to be monogamous, certain characters don't even care for sex - the whole gamut appears to be well covered by the books. It's also mentioned that Lisbeth probably has Asberger's Syndrome, which doesn't make her 'SUCH a male fantasy' at all, but very reclusive and antisocial. In the sections where she narrates, the voice is very different, very factual, and it helps to truly understand the choices her character makes. But it's true, things like that don't sell movie tickets, so certain aspects are probably being sensationalized. Just wait if they make Hollywood versions, it will be far worse I'm sure.

yes the movies are bad and boring, but how can you comment on a series of books you haven't even read? obviously any book and the movie based on it are two distinct entities with different creators behind each one. do the books have a hyper focus on the abuses of women? yes. but that is larsson's explicit intent. it is not only a universal comment on brutality but a geographically-specific one- are you up-to-date on your Swedish sexual assault stats? I'm not, but until I investigate further, I'm willing to give the author the benefit of the doubt that it is in fact a pressing issue in his country, worth commenting on (and even worth exaggerating to make a point).
finally, this trilogy is part of a genre in which some amount of sensationalism is unavoidable. if this series were about a girl who was abused and then went to therapy for the rest of her life it wouldn't be a mystery crime novel series now would it? instead the heroine fights the system relentlessly, kicking ass the whole time. she isn't supposed to be a role model or an example of how to "get over" a lifetime of hardship, she's an individual, one who happens to be very tough and even violent, not what I would consider a typical "male fantasy."

but these books aren't only about abuse, or even Lizbeth Salander, there are many other themes and characters, which attract readers as well. I was initially attracted by Mikael Blomvkist's character and the theme of rampant corruption in Swedish financial corporations. I must be really angry with men! (as are all the other men and women I know who have read and enjoyed the series).

whatever faults the books have-which are many, it's a pretty creative version of a super-formulaic genre-really can't be addressed until the critic has actual, first-hand knowledge of the material. I was also disappointed by the films, but I know that is not Larsson's fault.

Read the books, period. Otherwise you have no place to denounce them.
Having read them, I found Lisbeth to be a quintessentially modern heroine. It's not that she hates men, she hates everything about the "normal" trappings of human society, and rejects them with her carefully maintained distance. If she is forced to participate, she responds aggressively, as she should. She does not let anyone--man, woman, or government--tell her how to live. To my mind that is extremely admirable.
As with most film adaptations, the movies do not fully do the books justice, but having read the books I found the movies a satisfying enough experience. Yes, the sex abuse scene was more intense in the film than in the book, but that seems a petty reason to denounce the character of Lisbeth and the series as a whole.

As I stated at the beginning of the post, I was commenting on the film, not the books. I accept your criticism that I should not make presumptions about the author's intent. I guess I should have specified that I found the screenwriter's/director's interpretation of the book problematic. But I stand by my interpretation of the film itself.

Of course the world is going to eat it up. Have we not gotten used to the fact that there is a reason why mainstream is mainstream? It is asking too much of hollywood to make a film that caters to what a "subculture" wants. Hollywood appeals to the masses in order to generate revenue.

Also, from a filmmaker's point of view, sometimes a certain take on a situation is too boring or depressing, etc. to be adequate as a successful film.

Lisa--I think this world was a better place before you wrote this post.

I was wondering if there were other women out there that didn't like the books. I was the only one in my all-female book group that didn't like it. No one in the group felt the book was actually expressing a "pro woman" stance or really concerned about violence against women. Just that it was an interesting book, albiet twice as long as it needed to be. For me, it was just too sexually violent. I don't mind suspense, I enjoy reading mysteries. I just don't need to know about an anal plug with no lubirication being shoved inside a tied up passed out woman. To each their own but I can't see how the movie producers really think rape centers would welcome this movie.

Like many people here have said, Lisbeth's psychology is explained far better in the book, no-one should just watch the films and pass judgement on the whole thing; you can barely see any Lisbeth in the films, compared to what you learn about her from the books.

Well I have only seen the films (my girlfriend read the books and loves them). The rape scene wasn't a pleasure to watch, but I've seen a lot more gratuitous violence on screen for a lot less reason.

I don't think a character needs to be effed up through various types of abuse to be considered a strong female lead, I just think in this case she is. And many women are. And many women are not. This is one story about one individual, not everyone is going to enjoy it anymore than they might enjoy Saw or Gone with the Wind.

I don't particularly enjoy watching extreme violence in any shape, rape, war, abuse. And being a gay woman it's always disappointing when a girl who likes girls gets it on with a boy. But actually I think huge aspects of this film, and it's characters are very realistic. And I enjoyed the story thoroughly. That doesn't mean it made me comfortable throughout, but I sometimes enjoy being taken outside my comfort zone, to experience things that are usually more understated.

Some writers write to make points about the world, some film makers have bigger ideologies. Some people are just trying to write interesting stories, and make movies, and find themselves in political territory because they are a man writing about a woman, who's sexuality is fluid and had been abused.

Did he think about it becoming a political debate, I'm certain it crossed his mind, And the filmmakers are very aware of it. Would it be a better film or book if it had been written by a woman? Goodness. really, are we going to start telling women they can't possibly write male characters with any realism?

[SPOILER ALERT] The girl gets shot in the head and buried alive and survives... this is when we remember it's fiction. And hey, Kill Bill... one effed up lady there who was shot and raped and abused seeking revenge too by violent means. If anything lets talk about Taratino's pointless violence?

If you were bored by this movie, or the books, then that seems to me to be more of a plot and editing issue. But the truth is many people are also gripped by it.

What you think of a book or a film has a great deal to do with what you expect of and want from it. This is a story about an effed up girl, who has had bad things done to her, and does bad things. End of.

The books are, of course, much better than the movies. The third book was thebest of all. Tho graphic in their violence, without knowing Lizbeth's back story, it is very hard to judge. The movies took the "highlights" of her life and did as well as they could within time limits. I don't understand why the U.S. is making them also since the Swedish films were terrific. Too bad we won't be hearing from Stieg Larson again, unless there is a 4th book on his computer!!!! No one knows for sure. We'll have to wait and see.

If you haven't read the third book and don't want to be spoiled, don't read the last half of my comment.

I've only seen the first movie, but I completely devoured all of the books over the summer. I don't think the movie I saw did "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" (the book) justice. I really don't know if I would have been able to follow it as well without having read it beforehand. This may or may not have to do with the subtitles, though I find it disheartening that you refer to subtitles as a "level boredom."

However, I don't think your point really holds up. Your problem is that this young women is exposed to abuse and violence? Considering the Swedish title actually translates to "Men Who Hate Women," it seems that this is the point of the trilogy. (SPOILER ALERT! Seriously, especially for the third novel) A young woman spends her life exposed to systematic violence and abuse, all in the interest of a secret government op. She has an abusive father, she is locked up in a facility that she doesn't need to be in, she is declared mentally incompetent, she is raped, she is shot, she is accused of crimes she didn't commit.

To me the point is not simply that women are exposed to violence and how horrific that is and how awesome Lisbeth is - though all of that is certainly an important element - but also what a government agency is willing to do to a mostly innocent individual (a child at that) to protect a security secret. Though I can see how you would miss that, since you haven't actually read the books and haven't seen the final chapter of the trilogy.

@Judith Marcus I read an article about Larsson that mentioned his girlfriend might have a manuscript of a fourth novel. I don't remember whether or not it was finished, however. It was kind of an interesting article, it talked about how she's been with him for a million years, but because they aren't married she's being screwed out of his estate, yet she's the one who might actually be holding onto this maybe unfinished piece of his work.

I appreciate the candor and critical thought (and sense of humor) exhibited in this article. There is a pervasive notion out there that feminism inherently entails a hatred or resentment of men. This undermines the positive change the feminist movement has brought about by pitting females against males and characterizing feminists as angry man-hating over-reactors. (Which is, of course, an over-generalized stereotype.) The issue is not that men are oppressing us, but that we all live in a patriarchal society.

Just a quick aside, I never read Lisbeth as a straight-up lesbian. She has always been to me a bisexual character. She had been with men before Mikael and could be again. She chose to go to him and fell in love with him. I feel she is pretty much "equal opportunity" in sex of lovers.

I'd say across the board a lot of people are damaged, at varying levels with different results. Strength is often found through adversity. For men as well as women. For a hero to be sympathetic they are often also required to have some dark past. This past informs their character, and is basic plot device.

Without her adversity, there is no plot in this instance. That does not mean all heroines are effed up though. It greatly depends on your definition of heroine.

I do agree though that men get to behave badly more often, they are also allowed to be more ugly, and still sexy... again another blog entirely.

No-one's opinion is made more valid by anything but informed research. And strong females characters do actually litter films over the last century. I'd love to read some further anaylsis on female role models in film, with some figures and facts, and references

Also I don't think lisbeth's sexuality is particularly important, she is who is.

The reason why it's such a turning point in cinema, is that the female protagonist gets justice JUST like the vengeful male hero in the cinematic formula. She is not rescued, nor does she have to be the pacifistic high-road taker, she pursues and executes justice therefore confirming female agency that is so lacking in movies everywhere. For example let's take Avatar w/ a strong female hero, her land gets taken, her people gets humiliated, her faith trampled on, and worse, her father gets murdered. Who gets to avenge her father and all? The MALE outsider. Oh, the Last of the Mohicans formula...
Movies are supposed to reflect what the audience wish they could do in real life, and unfortunately it is still rare that women are represented as autonomous, proactive do-ers (unless they're scantily clad, but still are the prize for the male heros.
Lisbeth is the cinematic hero who transcend gender representation in film. Victimized than satisfyingly gets back w/ a tattoo pen and a dildo....

When is Bust gonna do a scathing review of how terrible twilight is? Or are the people in a position to have their words be read only going to talk about how dressing poorly detracts men and bitch and moan about how a book (Which the author of the post hasn't even read) that is at least making an attempt at portraying a realistic female heroine is oh-so-wrong?

If Taylor Lautner's abs were in it, I bet you'd be writing a post about how it was a fun kitschy movie for females of all ages.

To ina ina. What is the character's disability? As a woman with a disability myself, I'm always interested in seeing "highly intelligent women with disabilities who kick the system's ass" or similar characters but even though I saw the movie, for the life of me, I don't recall Lisbeth having a disability.

I suspect people have objections about Lisbeth's character--even well meaning feminists--because she's a woman. Replace her with any dude and you have a host of books--Snow Crash, the Da Vinci Code, Harry Potter--minus the sexual nature of the crimes against her (which is a fair critique, considering the double standard there regarding the kinds of misfortune characters--and people--live through).

This is just a book like lots of other books. Its sad that because the protagonist is female, its getting so much attention both positive and negative. There weren't this many reviews of the movie Die Hard, but there were probably at least as many of Alien when it came out.

I don't think the author of this post should be commenting on the books if she hasn't read them and didn't even know that the 3rd one was on our shores, for about a month before the post. I think the book series was great, and I didn't think that it was about a loads of abuses had to be done to Lisbeth's character for her to kick ass, I think that it plays in to the "once a victim most likely a victim again" that is shown in a lot of girl who turns her life around and kicks ass genre of media. I also didn't get the Men/Woman hating thing there was specific I hate this man but even the character (Spoiler alert) of Harriet who in all right should have hated men found a man to love and have children with she she loved her husband, and the only ones Lisbeth hated were men who thought they could get away with it. While these books are a work a fiction the basis Steig Larrson had to start this series was the gross injustice of female sexual abuse victim in Sweden to which he was a witness.