Lisbeth Salander is a badass, Tom Matlack writes, and she turns the Hollywood hero ideal on its head.
“Fuck You, You Fucking Fuck”
—T-Shirt worn by Lisbeth Salander, played by Rooney Mara, the first time she meets Mikael Blomkvist, played by Daniel Craig, in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
(Spoiler alert: If you haven’t already read the books, read a review of the books, and want to see the film but have yet to get to to the theater you might want to skip directly to the comments)
♦◊♦
The last time I wrote about the Dragon Tattoo trilogy, (“Can Dragon Tattoo Help Real Rape Victims?”) it was in the midst of a national obsession with the books. I pointed out that author Larsson “himself once witnessed a gang rape of a young girl that he was unable to stop—an event that shaped him as a feminist and as a novelist.” I interviewed rape and domestic abuse professionals to try to understand why we as a country loved the books but seemed to be unable to connect the dotted lines to what the author seemed to be getting at.
With the release of the film, I’m back to thinking about why this piece of art is so upsetting and ultimately compelling to us and frankly to me.
♦◊♦
When the tattooed and heavily pierced Lisbeth has to kick her female companion out of bed to deal with Blomkvist for the first time, who arrives with coffee, bagels and demands for her sleuth services, the t-shirt worn by our protagonist (quoted above) made me laugh out loud. Something about it just struck me as just right. As did the Lisbeth’s comment earlier in the film when being cross-examined about Blomkvist’s personal life. “Sometimes he performs cunnilingus,” she says and then takes a beat before adding, “not often enough, in my opinion.” Again, laugh-out-loud funny. She’s talking about Daniel Craig of James Bond fame, of course.
One of the things I loved about this film, and there were many, was the way it takes the conventional Hollywood role models and turns them on their head. Bond has forever had, as part of its plot, nameless and personality-less women as eye candy who cannot resist Bond’s powers. Well, here we have Bond himself certainly with a character to play, but very much in the background and serving as eye candy to the main event, which is Lisbeth.
She uses her supernatural techno-photographic-memory powers of reasoning to solve the crime and figure out that James Bond is strung up in some basement about to get sliced from stem to stern. She breaks her way into the devil’s lair to beat him senseless with of all things a golf club. The bad guy gets away in his car, bleeding profusely from the head, and our Lisbeth turns to Bond to ask permission, “Can I kill him?” Of course she doesn’t need to do that. It’s almost a sarcastic tip of the hat to dumb-ass gender roles of the past. She gets on her motorcycle and catches the bastard to insure his demise.
And of course, when she wants to have her way with the eye candy, Mr. Bond, she does that too in a way that doesn’t give him much of a chance to catch his breath. She really isn’t about to take “no” for an answer.
The fact that she is attractive because she is powerful in a totally non-conformist way, sick and bent on revenge, makes her fascinating. She breaks the mold that has gotten way too old and oppressive. And we love her for it. Or at least I did.
♦◊♦
Then there is the issue of sexual violence. At its core that’s what Dragon Tattoo is really about. If the debate in our pages is about rape culture, here we have it in the flesh. As my prior piece points out, the books and now the film are fundamentally about the appropriate response to violent rape.
Lisbeth’s character, and her being declared insane by the state, is born out of burning her father—“over 80% of his body”—in response to his predation. The mystery at the core of the plot involves the sadistic rape and murder of women.
We see Lisbeth violated by her legal guardian in awful detail. But rather than have the trauma immobilize her, the core of what makes Lisbeth so compelling is that she uses her powers to inflict merciless revenge. Her perpetrator is reduced to a quivering mass of flesh.
The New Yorker review of the film implies that the ultimate test of Mara’s Lisbeth is that her revenge and the original rape equally horrify us. I emphatically do not agree. I fucking loved watching her tattoo “I am a sadistic pig, a pervert, and a rapist” on the perpetrator and explain to him how she is blackmailing him with the video she has taped of him raping her.
For all my talk of pacifism, visits to prison, and adamant belief that the death penalty is wrong, this kind of vigilante revenge is not horrific in my view. It’s a kind of justice that reminds me of the wild west when a trial by your peers was just not practical, when a posse would chase after a bad guy and hand out justice in whatever way they deemed appropriate.
Again, the film flips gender roles from John Wayne to Lisbeth Salander. And I loved it.
♦◊♦
Finally there is the issue of sexuality itself. Blomkvist is divorced with a teenaged daughter. He has a long-term affair with his married co-worker, apparently with the approval of her husband. Lisbeth, despite her profound anti-social behavior, is irresistible to either gender. She sleeps with a woman early in the film and then commands Bromkvist into bed.
One could view the revealing scenes of Mara (and Craig) as exploitation, but really I think they are creating a new model for what counts as sexual in film: realism.
Watching Mara’s Lisbeth I was reminded of another one of my favorite female performers, Lady Gaga. Both are of unclear sexuality, both wear elaborate and shocking gear that contrasts sharply with the expectations of what it means to be “lady-like.” And through it all, through the insanity, the non-conformity of body and piercings and facial features, we arrive at something far more attractive than anything that we see in the dumbed-down women of our pornified world.
Lisbeth kicks ass, has sex, and gets even. She’s brilliant and really doesn’t give a shit what anyone else thinks. She is insane, and she knows it. But her insanity allows us to see the very insanity of our own expectations of her. And I loved her character for doing just that.
—Photo AP/Sony
love your review but Lisbeth isn’t insane
You’re right that the public seems to insist on missing the point. Lisbeth’s entire life is driven by the abuse she endured (made more explicit in the later novels of the trilogy), and her attempts to deal with it. The same is true for the mystery figure at the heart of the story. And the history that the story uncovers is one of extended, sadistic violence and murder directed against women. Most explicitly, the original title of the first novel was “Men Who Hate Women”; the title was changed to put the focus on Lisbeth and her anti-social persona by… Read more »
You hit it all the reasons why I adore the books on the spot!
Seriously -just because she planned to take advantage IF she got raped, doesn’t mean she knew she was going to get raped or deserved it. Rape is rape. He sexually assaulted her. It was without her consent. Bringing a camera along to use in case something does happen doesn’t mean he still didn’t rape her!
I never read the books. I never saw the Swedish film adaptation. I knew very little about Stieg Larsson’s stories before seeing the 2011 US adaption. So I went to the movie as a bit of a blank slate. It came across the middle-aged man’s fantasy with some gratuitous sex and violence thrown in. Lisabeth Salander, at least as portrayed in this movie, seems more like a male fantasy than a feminist ideal. She’s Lara Croft with more piercings. Mind you, I’m not criticizing the movie. I thought it was typical Hollywood fare and was entertaining. I just don’t understand… Read more »
Malin: “I read them as the usual bashing of any woman who’s not portrayed as stereotypically feminine all the rest of that kind of crap. And I’m really pleased to learn that that isn’t what either of you are saying.
And I’m really pleased to learn that that isn’t what either of you are saying.”
It would help to read my article “Bullied By Girls And Women: One Man’s Account” published in this magazine. Please do so. You’ll truly get where I’m coming from.
Sorry Malin, I just took another look at your comment I highlighted and I can’t let this slide. I’d like to ask once and for all, not just to you, but to anyone with this retort or rebuttal: Why? Why do you make that connection? What goes off in your mind that labels it bashing any woman that isn’t stereotypically portrayed as feminine? Seriously, everytime I point out where female characters hurt men and get away with it in stories, where male supporting characters are not developed in comparison to the main female protagonist, this always comes up. So any… Read more »
JH and Eagle33 – Thank you for your replies. I must say that at first I didn’t understand the nuances in your answers: I read them as the usual bashing of any woman who’s not portrayed as stereotypically feminine all the rest of that kind of crap. And I’m really pleased to learn that that isn’t what either of you are saying. So of course: while I greatly enjoy the fictional bad-ass Salander and all her actions (from the motorcycle to the tattooing of her rapist to the theft of the money – all of it!) as well as the… Read more »
Malin. Thank you for rereading my post. It’s sad that the when disagreements happen on forums regarding gender issues, that it is so often seen as an attack. I think this is indicative of the poor state we (those interested in gender issues) have got ourselves into and the radicalisation on both sides of the discussion that have so often instigated hostilities with ridiculous and unfounded attacks. Sadly this has had the net effect of making everyone else very edgy and prone to defensiveness. I agree with you on the possible reason for Larsson decision on the “sleeping with the… Read more »
While I find it interesting that a lot of men become such moral police when Lisbeth Salander is brought up in conversation, I do think you have a point, JH, in your last sentence: “What I believe this does show is that there is such a lack of interesting and admirable female characters in fiction that as soon as any character that is remotely interesting and shows any sign of self reliance appears they are hungrily lapped up by the female readers and paraded as a heroine, even if their actions should give pause for thought.” With that in mind,… Read more »
Malin A: “With that in mind, maybe just give in a little and perhaps even enjoy this bad-ass chick (and fictional character!) as she’s releasing bottled up anger for thousands of women around the world?”
Women like her scare me, Malin. Scare me a lot. Because of their “Eye for an eye” sense of justice.
They remind me so much of the women and girls who hurt me in the past that I purposefully avoid stories like this for general health reasons.
So to you, she’s a bad-ass chick. To me, she’s scary.
By the way, Malin, what do you think of this character having a sexual relationship with a pre-adolescent boy under the age of consent? You find that admirable in a bad-ass chick?
Eagle33 in Malin’s defence the character Salander sleeps with is 16 years old and therefore not pre-adolescent, however he is underage in the country they are both staying in, and she was helping him with his math homework if my memory is correct. I felt it was a bad decision by the author because my reading of Salander from what had been described in the first novel and the start of the second novel would have meant she would have reacted negatively to a man of her age sleeping with a girl of 16. Re: Malins comments, I don’t think… Read more »
I read “The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo” after some female colleagues of mine raved about it and in particular Lisbeth Sander. I decided to give it a go and see what all the fuss was about. After finishing the book and then the subsequent sequels, I was struck by two things. The majority of men in the books are vile misogynistic pigs with the excepting a couple of father figure types, a handful of throw away plot pushing characters and Mikael Blomkvist, the single most blatant “Mary Sue” I have ever come across. The second thing I noticed, and… Read more »
Why is everyone assuming that Lisbeth is punishing the Guardian only for herself? She specifically says that she will watch to make sure he doesn’t do it to anyone else. If I recall, there was no mention of the gender of potential victims. From the positions the Guardian had Lisbeth, it would be easy to see the victim also being a male. We aren’t told who his previous victims were. We only know that Lisbeth stopped him from doing more harm. Yes, it’s violence to answer violence. But as yet another victim (I’m not a survivor of rape any more… Read more »
Personally in terms of strong female characters I thought Hayao Miyazaki did an excellent job. I don’t like Lady Gaga and I doubt I would like Lisbeth. I would say Hayao Miyazaki’s most impressive female character was Nausicaä. I would say he is the only one that portrayed females I admired and found interesting. One of the things that has always turned me off about the Western version of strong women is the egoism, selfishness, vanity, anger and limited vision. But this is always was has turned me off with feminism itself.
Dear Assman,
Since when is feminism about egoism, selfishness, vanity, anger and limited vision??? My humble definition of this very charged F-word is the exact opposite: it’s about respectful individualism – independently of what your gender or sexual orientation may be (i.e. gender-roles suck).
A straight asswoman myself, I can NOT understand why that still is so threatening to men. After reading the comments here, I’m starting to think that Valerie Solanas had a point: everything men project on women is what they detest in themselves…
Much love you all of you out there.
assman,
While I’m not the film man that you are, I can relate to your observations that the Western version of a strong women is their “egoism, selfishness, vanity, anger and limited vision”. I agree that it rings true of feminism.
Tom, you support as justified (in the film) a female character taking out her revenge on a male character who raped her by later beating him up and then tattooing his forehead? How about a male character taking out his revenge on female character who had him convicted and imprisoned many years with a false rape allegation by later beating up the female character and tattooing her forehead? Would you support that as justified?
Feminists (and their misandry) are now mainstream. It is the MRAs who are the rebellious and non-conformist ones.
I saw the movie last night. Never read the books, had no idea what they were about. I did not see the European version of the movie. I loved it. Truly, a gorgeous film. Tom, if you find Lisbeth / Lady GaGa type characters strangely attractive I recommend checking out Suicide Girls and ‘Yo-Landi Vi$$er’ from the South Africa rap artists ‘Die Antwoord’. What made Lisbeth and Blomkvist so interesting to me is just how alternative they are. Regardless of how I feel about gender roles in the family or the community…up on the silver screen traditional = BORING. Hopefully… Read more »
right on Jake.
Mr. Matlack, Lisbeth Salander, is clearly not “insane”. Stieg Larsson goes to great lengths – practically the entire “The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest” – to demonstrate that she isn’t. Lisbeth is a damaged renegade with a strong taste for vengeance, and her life of abuse by every authority around her has made her moral code very different than most people’s. But since you have read Larsson’s books and have a way with words yourself, I would think you’d choose your descriptions of her a little more carefully. You seem to have a habit of throwing around the word… Read more »
Claire: “You seem to have a habit of throwing around the word “insane” in describing women.”
Care to provide evidence of him describing women as “Insane” every chance he gets? Or are you just going on assumption?
Hey Claire I was actually just quoting the film. Lisbeth says more than once that she is “insane”. But it is said in a way, as I point out in my piece, that makes clear that she isn’t though she has been declared a ward of the state. The rest of us are. She does say it in bed to Daniel Craig just after describing burning 80% of her father’s body as almost a kind of joke, like I am a badass don’t fuck with me. Which I actually thought was funny, not serious. Though obviously her behavior/character pushes the… Read more »
Tom: “One of the things I loved about this film, and there were many, was the way it takes the conventional Hollywood role models and turns them on their head. Bond has forever had, as part of its plot, nameless and personality-less women as eye candy who cannot resist Bond’s powers. Well, here we have Bond himself certainly with a character to play, but very much in the background and serving as eye candy to the main event, which is Lisbeth.” Reverse Objectification, right? And you love it because “Bond” objectified women? Eye for an eye justice, I see. I… Read more »
Eagle33 totally respect your POV as a survivor. I think the title “Men Who Hate Women” doesn’t have to be interpreted as broadly as you are. I think “men” refers only to the characters in the film who are rapists, not all men. And it doesn’t preclude the reality of women raping men.
Tom: “Eagle33 totally respect your POV as a survivor. I think the title “Men Who Hate Women” doesn’t have to be interpreted as broadly as you are. I think “men” refers only to the characters in the film who are rapists, not all men. And it doesn’t preclude the reality of women raping men.” Yet, why bring up the books as an illustration of “Rape Culture” then? What “Rape Culture” are you talking about? Does it include women raping men as well, hurting men? I doubt it when it comes to these books. Because let me put two and two… Read more »
Eagle again I am not trying to discredit or in any way minimize your experience as a survivor. Please hear me on that point. I am only commenting on one movie and some fictional characters. That’s all. I am trying hard to keep my comments to the specific and avoid the general for the very reason that I have no way to know what you, or any other survivor, have experienced and therefore can’t speak for you.
Sorry if I present myself as to upfront or anything. It’s just that I’ve read up on the series, wheras you’ve only seen the one movie. The above three things just trouble me, is all: 1) The original title 2) The author’s experience being powerless to prevent a woman from being raped 3) Rape Culture That’s why I avoid the books like the plague. Because I’m afraid of it heading into “Men = Bad, Women = Good” territory. Similiar to stories where female portagonists are developed at the expense of the men. Even knocking them down in order to make… Read more »
I disagree that the male lead was “objectified”. At least in that sense. For that you can go see “Sex in the City”.
Women objectify men differently. Women objectify men by the job, by their wealth or power, by their social status. Seen that way you can see tons of objectification of men in just about any film, absolutely including any Bond movie. Bond himself is rich, powerful, successful. He is a walking stereotype of female objectification of men. The only thing he lacks is a title of nobility.
I’m going to hold out on whether or not this is actually a feminist movie where the roles are turned around. If anyone has watched the Swedish version of the trilogy, they will see a truly feminist movie. In that depiction there are at least one, possibly two, things which I already noticed were not present in the American version. First, in the second film in the Swedish trilogy we are shown shots of Lisbeth with her shirt off and it is pretty clear that she works out. There is muscle definition where women are not supposed to have muscle… Read more »
I guess Lady Gaga does not identify as feminist, right? Also, the fact that Lady Gaga dresses like that actually trivializes the rebelliousness of wearing those kinds of cloths. Actually what trivializes the rebelliousness of wearing clothes of any kind is that wearing clothes doesn’t make you a rebel. Opposing authority makes you a rebel. That’s something which Lady Gaga has done (while wearing quite sensible and normal clothes). She wears the weird clothes because it’s art. Possibly art you don’t like but art, it is. Ms Magazine asks if Lady Gaga is a feminist (she isn’t, but they sure… Read more »
Agreed, Lady Gaga is a brand, period.
Okay MJH I take your points. Haven’t seen the other films but would like to. And just commenting on my reaction to Mara and Gaga without trying to make any broader statement than that.
I also liked the American version of ‘Girl with the Dragon Tattoo,’ although I liked Noomi Rapace’s original Lisbeth better than Rooney Mara’s. (They’re played slightly differently, although I don’t think one is better/worse than the other.) I remember when these books and movies first came out, people were asking if the graphic rape was really necessary. Does the heroine of the movie have to be violently raped for us to have a story about how gender-based violence is bad? I didn’t know that story about Stieg Larsson’s history – now that I do, his motivation for having his heroine… Read more »
Wonderful comment Laura. Totally agree about what violence is just there for the hell of it and what is woven into the fabric of the actual meaning of the story. Here it is important and in fact goes to the core of the film. Also agree in spades about “more of in movies are women who are unconventional and awkward and who don’t care.”
I loved the Lisbeth character, because she was an unconventional badass and she got her revenge.
yup Sherri
Larsson’s longtime partner, Eva Gabrielsson, has written that the Millennium Trilogy does reflect events that have happened one time or another in Sweden. This would indicate that the work’s were written as revenge – and Larsson used their writing as a personal therapy, to address matters as journalist which he could not publish. The books were of course published posthumously. Stieg Larsson very deliberately plays with the edges of normal and abnormal psychology. Lisbeth – Is she a sociopath or is her life and conduct normal given her experiences? It’s an interesting device to allow brutality and other issues such… Read more »
great comment MH. I guess I take the film in the same genre as many other horror/action films where violence and brutality are part of the fantasy. To say you respond to Lisbeth favorably is a kind of gut reaction to a fictional character in a fantasy. It has no bearing, in my mind, on whether or not you translate any of what she does into real life. Do I like the characters in the Borne series or Oceans 11? Sure, in a stupid fun kinda way. Doesn’t mean I support robbing casinos are shooting people up. What I liked… Read more »
Tom – maybe we just associate with different types of people. P^) some years ago, I was introduced to a very interesting lady who became a colleague teacher. She specialized in Business and Finance. She was independently wealthy ++. She was well liked and very social – lots of people about all the time. Then there was a book that many read. It dealt with a story of insider dealing, stock rigging and international money making by naughty means. Everyone loved the book. Then my colleague, seeing so much approval for the story, admitted that she had done it all… Read more »
I’m torn about how I felt about the movie. I wasn’t prepared for the gender/sexual violence but I did love Lisbeth’s character. I’m definitely a feminist but of the belief that nonviolence in the face of abuse as a tactic is a luxury for many women & POC. That being said, there were a few hypermasculine tropes that ran throughout the movie, seemingly to pacify traditional viewers who couldn’t handle Lisbeth otherwise. I.e. hot older male journalist/ladies man, made alive again by 23 yr old woman who is “different in every way” (actual quote from the movie).
agree with that marie but was nice to see the stupidity of a hollywood character on the man rather than the woman for once.
Huh? I didn’t think the male lead came across as stupid at all. Beyond my comment above about boinking insane people anyway… which was kinda unavoidable within the original script. But really over the last twenty years or so there’s been a lot of improvement on the leads. Where there has not been much improvement is among the nobody roles. Nondescript bad guys without lines are almost always males and usually white males. There’s not really an equivalent of the one dimensional thug bad guy as a woman. It can’t be a woman for example, who snatches Lisbeth’s bag at… Read more »
I truly believe everyone should see the original trilogy from 2009. While I have not seen this “remake”, I can not imagine that it will live up to the original. After a brilliant performance by Noomi Rapace as Lisbeth, it can not get any better. I don’t believe there was a need for a remake – well only for the ones that are too lazy to read subtitles!
I agree that it is hard for me to imagine the Hollywood glam version will live up to the original trilogy movies.More flash than substance would be my guess. I will of course go and see it at some point. However, I do find myself in a bit of a moral dilemma. I feel that I cannot really find a true reason to excuse or justify the type of violence in these stories, though it would be denial for me to pretend it doesn’t exist or that I can’t understand that level of need for retaliation. My experience is that… Read more »
Jack I don’t know that we have to take a stand on whether Lisbeth’s actions are moral if they were real. All we have to do is respond to them as art. As fantasy/art I think it’s okay to think she’s wicked cool. Kind of like Bond is cool, only way better.
“I don’t believe there was a need for a remake”
I agree – but then again I like what some would call Art House Films!
I do fear that a lot has been lost in translation, and it shows in the books, and then the Film reduces it even more. Tone, culture and all the nuances end up cut from the script before anything gets cut and ends up on the cutting room floor.
NIna I wish I had seen the original films. Will seek them out.
Are you saying that’s another possible rape scene then? or that it might have become so? That whole scene seemed pretty messed up. Sure she’s cute but who in their right mind has sex with an insane killer they only just met — who’s not much older than their own daughter? and technically a subordinate / employee? while possibly under observation by a serial killer? SUCH a bad idea on so many levels.
True enough David but really how about all the shit that James Bond does…not so bright either.
Well a movie is more limited and I didn’t sense any reluctance by him, but perhaps in the books there is some, so I wondered about your comment and “don’t take no”.
So… uh spoiler alert. It was a nice movie… so don’t read this if you haven’t seen it . I haven’t read any of the books and I missed a few minutes at the start of the film, so I don’t know if the film portrayed her as being justified in killing her father. She didn’t come across that way to me. She came across as a violent sadistic killer. Like one of the darker versions of Batman. So this seems a darker version that your own view which sees her I suppose as more of a victim, specifically a… Read more »
She is definitely raped. Read up on consent. First of all, she’s coerced into having sex for money by her legal guardian (who is supposed to provide for her regardless, it’s not like she could “just say no”), second of all, the second time she goes back to “get more money” she says she was expecting to give a blowjob (“which is disgusting enough”), not be handcuffed, tied up, etc. If you’re unclear on whether or not it was rape before, when the guy handcuffs her and she starts screaming and crying and tries to get away and he doesn’t… Read more »
Well I didn’t mean if it fit the legal definition. Sweden is a very off place anyway for that stuff, though perhaps less so if the story was set in what? the 1980s? But plot wide definitely not rape. She sees it as an opportunity to get out of the custodial system. It’s more than giving the guy a blow job for money — which also wouldn’t be rape. It’s her action plan. She’s even the instigator the 2nd time around. How can you plan to get raped? Well let’s compare with a male lead pulling the same stunt. In… Read more »
Why can’t it be both? Holmes was tortured and the pain was still real even if it served a purpose. The torturer was still torturing.
Is it a feminist point of view to see women as innocent reactive victims and refuse to see them as morally mixed masters of their own fate? Apart from anything else the former just makes for a less interesting character.
I think that’s why I said it could be both? She’s committing to the action but it’s not anything she’d consent to in any other circumstance. The bad guy is still engaging in what he conceives of as rape, I presume. Her inner monologue doesn’t change his experience. Anyway, I’m all for interesting characters, I just think it’s possible to see that Holmes is being tortured even if he’s engaged in the act to further a bigger plan. The pain is still as real. His psychological trauma may or may not be as profound afterwards. It might be more profound,… Read more »
I think the part that makes it cloudy is that in the case of Holmes the act of violence itself is what makes it torture. In the case of Tattoo we’re talking about rape, which is nonconsensual sex. So the question some may have is “Can you call it rape when she literally put herself in that situation?” Its not as if they went out on a date and he went too far unexpectedly. Its not as if she was jogging along and he snatched her up. Its not as if he slipped something in her drink when she wasn’t… Read more »
Read the book, it’s clear she does not anticipate being attacked, and is very much smaller and weaker than the perp. Also, she is forced to go see him because she needs a new computer after she is attacked in the subway station. Otherwise she would have stayed far away
You know its a similar theme as is used by C.S.Lewis in The Lion The Witch and The Wardrobe (which was in turn based on the crucifixion of Christ).
Ooops. spoiler alert for Lion Witch Wardrobe and “the Bible” there 😉
That’s a profound point. DB. I can see that.
I had similar feelings about the movie Teeth a year or two back. (Spoiler) From what I had heard it was about a girl that turns out to have an actual set of teeth in her vagina that can be used in devestating ways. Well from what people online were saying they were making the lead girl out to be some ultimate victim and how the movie could serve as a lesson to guys on how to really approach sex in a consensual manner…… Then I saw the movie myself and saw that out of the 4 times she used… Read more »
A few corrections from a Swede, if I may. In no particular order: 1 – Women (and men) do get raped in Sweden. In fact, statistically they have a much greater chance of convicting their rapist than in the U.S. since legal system isn’t as antiquated and sexist. So why Sweden would be an “off place” in regards to this eludes me. 2 – Lisbeth Salander is most definitely, without a doubt, raped. Not sure what rock you live under, DavidByron, but I sure hope you never EVER end up in the jury of a rape case. Shit! 3 –… Read more »
What movie/book are you talking about? Lisbeth does not kill her father. At the time the story opens, she has not killed anybody. She does not go into her encounter with the guardian “eyes wide open”. The book makes it clear that the guardian ambushes her, immobilizes her, and has his way with her in a brutal way–and that she DOES NOT expect it. She expects him to require her to have regular sex with him in exchange for privileges; she does not expect to be tortured. The second time, she turns the tables on him before he touches her.… Read more »
AD:
I hadn’t read the books in several years and just got the comment in the film that she had burned her father and had some memory that it was because of childhood trauma inflicted by him on her mom and her. Sorry if my memory was fault on that point. Agree with the rest BTW.
If you had read the book, she does not “count on getting raped,” she thinks her court appointed guardian will force her to give him a blow job again. Which still counts as rape, of course, but she doesn’t anticipate the sadistic level of the attack at all. She thinks he’s a perv, not a sociopath
I think you answered your own objection there!
Wow buddy, this is wrong on so many levels.
Do you really find that sort of facial mutilation “more attractive” than a non-mutilated face?
I think you’ve stepped into it again buddy.
The rad fems can claim you approve of female disfigurement to please yourself.
Just a heads up there bud.
“rationality free zone”
No what I was saying is that 3 dimensional characters are way more interesting than the 2 dimensional ones, no matter what anyone says.