The Girl Who Played With Fire

Having read reviews of the second Stieg Larsson Millennium film, The Girl Who Played With Fire, which were critical and claimed it’s nowhere near as good as the first film, I was worried. No need. I’d read complaints that there weren’t any cameo appearances by big names. There was one, actually, with Per Oscarsson as Holger Palmgren, and he was good as this respectable old man, which is different from his younger days.

Flickan som lekte med elden

There is simply no need for big names. And if we can agree that the books hardly count as great literature, but are great reads, then the films are in the same vein. Not exactly Bergman, but good, exciting films. And that’s enough. This second film may well qualify as a ‘low budget’ film, but what more do we need? It’s all there, inasmuch as you can put a long book like this into a two hour film.

Good Swedish scenery, and they may have turned the seasons upside down, but I’ll forgive them for that. Lisbeth’s flat is somewhere we’d all love to live, and it’s good to see it for real. A lot of the inner reasonings you get in the books are missing, but we can’t have everything.

Flickan som lekte med elden

Why they have Lisbeth using Windows on her Mac is beyond me. Old Windows at that, according to Son who watched with me. Less of the hacking than would have been fun, but I daresay there was no time for all that clever stuff.

Flickan som lekte med elden

The advantage with giving big name actors a miss, is that we get to see many unknowns (to me, at least) who are both good at what they do, and who fit the roles better than the big stars might. I gather that Paolo Roberto plays himself, which is weird, but fun. If this is what we get on a budget, I’m all for it. Give us more!

Advertisements

3 responses to “The Girl Who Played With Fire

  1. Pingback: More Uppsala tails « Bookwitch

  2. I was surprised to discover Paolo Roberto was real person! (Can’t remember HOW I found this out, but it’s cleverly done.)

    Have only seen Film 1, for which the general consensus around the office was “good, but some of the sadism could have stayed on the page.” For a bunch of twenty/thirty somethings, we’re surprisingly squeamish.

  3. The sadism is very off putting, but I think necessary. And having read the book, you’re at least forewarned and can half cover your eyes if you must. It’s going to be the sex in film two…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s