The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Empowering or exploitive to women?

[Burgman]

I haven't seen the new film coming out but have read the series and seen the original film in all its subtitled glory. There is sex in the novels and nudity in the films, but the femme heroine is a strong and capable person.

There is rape involved, gay sex and condescension on occasion. I am guessing that Fincher's interpretation will garner much discussion and outrage by some.

I enjoyed the series but am curious as to others reaction and thoughts on the film here at DU.

[ScreamingMeemie]

1. The books sucked.

Never got more than halfway through the first. I don't get the attention they have received. I call them the "Twilight" series for those who want to act edumacated.

[dionysus]

4. it's translated from swedish, it reads awkward at times.

after you get used to it, the story is great

[ScreamingMeemie]

11. I understand that it is translated from Swedish. The story was horrible and violent for no need...

...and I found myself drifting off. To me, it is "Twilight" for wannabe's.

[dionysus]

219. to each their own.

[Morning Dew]

24. I was impressed at how good the translation was.

Heh. Funny how that all works, isn't it?

[northoftheborder]

5. Read the books, not sure if I want to see the movie.

I thought the books were riveting in the plot, the characters unforgetable. However, the violence portrayed made me wince, and I don't think I could comfortably watch that in a film if it follows the book accurately.

[kenny blankenship]

9. Saw the movies and they sucked horribly. Each worse than the last.

By the end of the third I was feeling embarrassed to have sat through it. Wasn't paying to see it so that helped.

[Nye Bevan]

14. Some great books are turned into really horrible movies.

Exhibit A for me would be "Bonfire of the Vanities".

[Burgman]

15. So you stole content?

And even though you thought the first "sucked horribly" you went back and watched the second which you felt sucked horribly as well and then watched the third installment of the trilogy....

You are either a film critic, a masochist, or a very curious person with lots of extra time on his/he hands.

[Nye Bevan]

19. To be fair, I saw "Star Wars Episode 1- the Phantom Menace" which sucked horribly,

and then I proceeded to watch Episode 2, in the hope (forlorn as it turned out) that it would not suck.

[Burgman]

23. the argument stands in my opinion.

It also allays to the fact that IMHO, your taste in fiction comes from a base of spaghetti westerns in space. While Star Wars was lots of fun eye candy, it was certainly far from the art of storytelling in film. The story was hackneyed, trite and well worn having been told countless times before.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

162. Fantastic planet - one of the oldest, bestest, movies made.

[Burgman]

163. LOL Leslie Nielson bieng serious.

Loved that film just for its Je ne sais qui.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

164. True, that, but that movie kicked ass on special effects

Before there were things like special effects. Even better, the plot came from the old B movies where plots were as important as the stars they signed for a role.

It, more than any other flic, including the Jules Verne moon movie, created the whole genre.

Even today, it is a very satisfying movie. The idea that a late great civilization collapsed because they were too close to a problem - of their own making! Fantastic.


Compare flash Gordon with FP, and you see what I mean. They made a real movie, with incredible ideas and mental imagery, and added great special effects that simply added to the end result. I bet that some of the money interests were scared shitless when they saw the proofs and last edits.

[kenny blankenship]

22. I could be all three.

But no I didn't steal this "content". If I had gone to that kind of bother to get a hold of such crap, I'd be way too ashamed to admit it to strangers on the internet.

[Burgman]

25. curious. Why is this so offensive to you?

[kenny blankenship]

29. I said it was shitty not offensive. It's just a crappy trio of films.

you want to see a much better, much smarter movie with a strong female lead, also featuring a revenge fantasy plot, but w/ a character and plot written by someone that knows that a revenge fantasy can't be treated with a purely straight face by a grown-up, then watch Sympathy for Lady Vengeance. It avoids the groan inducing stupidity that the Girl With A Dragon Tattoo wallows constantly in by avoiding taking itself as deadly serious, socially relevant stuff.

No doubt Fincher's version will be better than the original Girl Who *, but it'll be a while before I can purge the memory of the original's inanity from my mind. If it doesn't cost me anything to watch, maybe I'll see it.

[Burgman]

33. "If it doesn't cost me anything to watch, maybe I'll see it.

LOL!

You don't even know, do you?

[kenny blankenship]

47. Well it could cost me two hours and my self respect if it's as bad as the original

Fool me once shame on you - fool me twice... It's a tricky question. American remakes of Scandinavian films usually suck, like the American remake of Let The Right One In, and also to a lesser extent, Insomnia. On the other hand, in this case there's practically no chance it could be worse. Now, I don't know if it will also cost me the price of a ticket at the cinema, but as of this writing I'm very strongly inclined to prevent that from ever happening. When I know for sure, I'll be sure to let you know, since it means so much to you.

[DCKit]

54. The English language version of "Let the Right One In" was a Xerox of the original film.

The sets, the dialogue, the setting, the kids, the parental situation, the back story, all the same.

[kenny blankenship]

93. You can have a shot for shot remake, and lose the tone, characterization & theme

There's a world of intriguing/disturbing stuff going on in Let The Right One In that has zip to do with vampires. And it just never made the translation in Let Me In. As a "straight" horror story, it would be dull as the town it's set in. You don't witness anything shocking about "vampires" that you haven't seen a million times before. They have teeth, suck blood, explode in sunlight, climb trees and fly around just like they did in 1931. The American remake tries to make the monster manifestation an interesting part of the story, which just loses the point. The interest in Let The Right One In is generated elsewhere - the abnormal psychology of Oskar, his castration anxiety, the gender confusion (for both viewers and Oskar) of Eli, and their mutual discovery and bonding as two abnormal people who will never fit in in "everyone belongs" Sweden, and therefore how they're fated to be a couple.

This review, http://www.tor.com/blogs/2010/10/let-the-right-one-in-versus-let-me-in , explores things that give the characters and theme of the original film their depth and power to intrigue and disturb, and how the remake prudishly hacks those things out of the story (pun intended), turning an eerily quiet, deeply disturbing romance with swirling gender identity/sexuality issues into an Acme brand American horror movie with some tacked on, "European" moodiness.

[Ghost of Tom Joad]

181. also the actors themselves

the Americanization took away the haunted look from Eli. The gay subtext was removed, we never saw his father and his friend. Setting it in New Mexico was also rather lame.

[DCKit]

53. "Stole Content"? They're on Netflix.

I've only watched the first one and I kinda' liked it.

It was a totally fucked-up story, but there are too many people like that. Gotta teach us sheep to watch our backs a bit better.

[blogslut]

94. The Swedish Dragon Tattoo Films are available on Netflix

Perhaps you should consider an apology to this poster.

[Burgman]

155. Netflix is a paid for service.

If the poster watched the film on Netflix, he or she paid for viewing.

[Gabi Hayes]

171. there's this thing called a.....library. that's where I 'stole' it

I felt bad and returned it, though.

It sucked bad and hard.

Trite as trite could be, along with oozing with pretentiousness

Telegraphed every move.

Even the ultraviolence was lame

[kenny blankenship]

188. But it meant well.

Last edited Wed Dec 21, 2011, 12:37 PM - Edit history (2)

Not to threadjack, but I think the GW* trilogy had a unending torrent of problems arising out of conflicting demands of its mixed genres.

One the one hand it's a revenge fantasy. On the other it's a political thriller. Revenge fantasies need fantastic characters and implausible situations. Political thrillers on the other hand need to ply us with realism in settings, characters and plot mechanics --the surface of a somewhat familiar and believable world-- so that we will also accept as believable the film's CT about secret workings of the world that lie below that familiar surface. These generic needs are clashing more or less constantly and earsplittingly in the TGW* movies. Fantasy characters moving through thriller terrain strip it of the veneer of realism, and makes for non-stop campy badness. (It's worse in part 2 and worst in 3, so if you stopped after TGWTDT you saved yourself a lot of eyerolling and facepalming.) And above the fantasy and thriller genre conflict rises the didactic voice of a film intended to take on "a very important social problem!" Put them together and you got a whole lot of oozing what you said.

[Gabi Hayes]

226. hard to take writing/filmmaking that purport to be

realistic portrayals of the sorts of things this dreck sets out there, then present utterly implausible scenarios, one after the others. how many aircraft carriers could have been sailed through the myriad plot holes in this turkey, just for starters?

btw, have you read any of Kim Stanley Robinson's trilogies (especially Forty Days of Rain, etal), or William Gibson?

non-shlock writing, believable plot lines, intriguing scientific projections, engaging characters

[eridani]

31. I agree. Text provides some distance from violence

Imagery does not. And I bet there won't be much about the mathematics and the hacking in the movie either.

[alittlelark]

10. Wow... I read the 1st in Madrid (a 3 week vacation)

The 2nd in Paris, and the 3rd in Rome. I'm sure there were other sights to see (I did see many), But my favorite memory of the trip was reading all 3 books.

It was hard to find the 3rd in English, but I made it a mission.

[ScreamingMeemie]

17. I am glad you enjoyed them. Me? Not so much.

Dragon Tattoo is in my bookcase. I swear I tried three times to get through it. The other two are in the box they were wrapped in when my father gave them to me. Please don't tell him.

[Ghost of Tom Joad]

182. I couldn't read them either, I finally got the first on on cd and listening is much better than

trying to read the damn thing.

[Scuba]

58. I thought the books were great, and am also a Packer fan. Weird, huh?

[Habibi]

78. LOL!

Ditto!

[mainer]

60. I'm with you. Bad writing, yet adored by those who seldom read thrillers

I can name about a hundred better-written thrillers. I call it the "Celestine Prophecy" of mysteries. Nobody in publishing knows why it's on the list.

[yodermon]

75. Just my opinion: It needed more editing.

The endless descriptions of Swedish food and Ikea Furniture for example.

I thought the overall story arc was nicely thought out and very creative, and the Lisbeth's character is of course fantastic and, I think what propelled the books' immense popularity.

[eridani]

166. I actually considered that useful

It kept reminding me that Sweden isn't the same as America, or wherever else on earth you live. Probably boring mainly to Swedes.

[truebrit71]

88. I'm half way through the second book and they have both been absolutely brilliant..

...i think the suckage is in the eye of the beholder...

[rhett o rick]

131. I have read all three and agree with you. I liked the strong female character. nm

[bigwillq]

222. I agree. Couldn't get through it myself.

I thought it was terrible. So boring, and not very well-written, although I think some of it got lost in translation.

[seabeyond]

2. male fantasy and glorification of rape in the name of feminism.

and the writing sucks....

they had to give away the first 1000 in sweden. it was only after he died and they changed the title from men who hate women, that it became popular. media hyped and the public bought into it.

[dionysus]

7. i highly doubt you read the books. sorry.

[Burgman]

8. Don't you think that the original title was a bit more than a straight in your face title?

[eridani]

34. I saw it as glorifying revenge on rapists n/t

[a la izquierda]

157. That's exactly how I saw it.

Not glorifying violence upon women, but finding gratification in a woman having it out with her attacker.

[Major Nikon]

38. Only your narrow radical feminist view is allowed to speak in the name of feminism?

I think not.

[Are_grits_groceries]

57. Those books may have gotten off to a rocky start,

but the people who read them have given them high praise in general. Publicity can make people curious enough to buy the books, but it rarely forces so many people to have favorable opinions.

After a slow start, I was hooked. Did it have faults? Of course it did, but few books don't in some way.

Did he glorify rape or just make the violence of the crime more realistic in its depiction of what happens? I believe the latter.




.

[seabeyond]

63. you will NEVER see a graphic, explicit, drawn out scene of male on male rape. never.

it is a reality. and you will never see that scene in the movie. if it is in a movie, they will be sure to have cuts and angles so much is left to imagination and not much is viewed at all. you will never see a graphic, explicit, drawn out scene of rape of a child. it is a reality, and we will never see it in a movie.

women. entertainment. a large market for rape porn in the porn world. so when we say people should be uncomfortable, it is not about entertainment, it is a reality that should be seen, i have to wonder why, it is only women that we are entertained or used to feel the horrors of rape.

[JustAnotherGen]

64. amen seabeyond

I already gave my response in the women's forums.

I don't know about you - but I found Major Nikon saying 'radical feminist' like it's a 'bad word/phrase' to be highly amusing.

[seabeyond]

74. major whatever has yet to be on womens side in all of his posts. i dont take him too seriously. nt

[JustAnotherGen]

79. Me either!

[redqueen]

67. It concerns me that hardly anyone else notices

let alone questions this.

[cliffordu]

71. Sorry - you are wrong about this.

"American Me" with James Edward Olmos.

Male on male rape ending with the murder of the victim by penetration with a large knife.

The HBO series "Oz", multiple scenes of male on male rape, including one of the lead characters tattooing a swastika on the rectum of his victim.

"Deliverance" ("Squeal like a little piggy" still chills me).

IIRC, "Midnight express"

[EOTE]

73. That's right, the movie "Pulp Fiction" doesn't exist.

Neither do the movies "Salo" or "Sleepers" or "The Prince of Tides" off the top my head. Those films surely don't exist, so the point you have to make is very valid.

[seabeyond]

77. pulp fiction is the one out of all of them i have seen. and it is exactly how i describe. male on

male rape. a short scene. much hidden. much just in expression on face. and that is it. very lightly touched and shown so you got a glimmer of experience and then went on with the story. it absolutely makes my point.

[EOTE]

81. So your issue is that male rape on film isn't graphic enough?

You should know that Pulp Fiction is the mildest out of those movies I've listed by a long shot. Here are some more that I found using a simple google search:

Blood and Bone (2009)
The Kite Runner (2007)
Abby (1974)
Valhalla Rising (2009)
Killing Zoe (1993)
Brubaker (1980)
In Hell (2003)
Scum (1979)
Mysterious Skin (2004)
Bad Boy Bubby (1993)
I'll Sleep When I'm Dead (2003)
Descent (2007)

Regardless, the issue is that you simply say whatever comes to your mind without paying any attention to whether it's true or not. What you said was absolutely, positively wrong, no matter which way you look at it. But so long as you get to make your point, regardless of how ignorant and useless it is, you're good to go.

[seabeyond]

82. you continue to reinforce the point i made. thanks....

here are just three movies. again, i have seen none on your list. but do take note how they "gently" do a male on male or child rape scene. that was my argument. that is what you ignore.

"you will NEVER see a graphic, explicit, drawn out scene of male on male rape." this is the statement i made, that you are arguing.



valhalla rising

A rape scene, which is more suggested than shown. In a hallucinatory montage, some of the images appear to show a man on top of another man, who is being pushed into the mud. The rape is not particularly noticeable if you're not aware of it, although is quite clear if you are.

blood and bone ???

Sex & Nudity
EditHistory
None.

Violence & Gore
EditHistory
Lots of brutal martial arts fights and a sword fight.

Profanity
EditHistory
Lots of profanity throughout the film.

Alcohol/Drugs/Smoking
EditHistory
lots of smoking

Frightening/Intense Scenes
EditHistory
some fights have blood on the floor but there is nothing to bad [ this film should be a 15 not a 18]

the kite runner

There is one scene where a boy is beaten, restrained, and sodomized by a larger bully. It however is depicting more implicitly than graphically.

[EOTE]

83. Ahhh, so a man being raped with a knife isn't graphic enough for you. Thanks for proving my point.

There is no issue disgusting enough that you won't use as a slam on men. Now you've gotten to the point where you complain that the rape of men in cinema isn't graphic enough, even though there have been many absolutely stomach turning scenes. A man getting raped with a knife isn't sufficient for you. My god that's sickening.

On edit: And you haven't addressed CliffordDU at all. Deliverance? That's not graphic enough for you? A rape scene that I've never seen without my eyes closed at least partially through it because it's so graphic and disturbing? You take being wrong to a whole new level.

[hifiguy]

92. +1 Well said. nt

[seabeyond]

106. post 105. i dont agree. nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

109. who really cares how many of the movies you've seen?

With the agenda you have, one would think it might be a good idea for you to see these movies, so as to be up on them. But the mere fact that you haven't seen them is meaningless in the context of deciding whether or not they contain male-on-male rape. Your movie viewing habits don't get to dictate reality.

[seabeyond]

110. how we change the issue. i never said there are NO movies that have male on male rape.

did i.

[EOTE]

113. Nope, you simply said they weren't graphic enough. A man being raped with a knife...

isn't graphic enough for you. Or the myriad other examples I and others have provided. Good for you, you're desensitized to a level beyond any decency.

[seabeyond]

115. again, i have not seen the movie. you have named off quite a few movies and i have check them out

i put in more than enough time on this. and still in your purposeful obtuseness you ignore the issue. some will get it. you will not. waste of time.

[EOTE]

117. The issue is that you said there will never be an extended, graphic portrayal of male rape on the

silver screen. That's not only patently untrue as has been demonstrated by MANY DUers here other than myself, but it's such an incredibly stupid and boneheaded statement that I can only conclude that it was a bold faced lie on your part. That's all you ever do. You throw out ridiculous and untrue statements and then when you're called on your bullshit, you accuse others of being obtuse (as if anyone could be obtuse regarding your posts) and accuse them of ignoring the real issue. Give me a break. No one here is nearly as stupid as you think they are.

[MedicalAdmin]

123. While I think this post skirts with calling a member out,

I also find it to be an astute analysis of a poster who provided good content up to the point where she makes a mistake and then she seems to defend her factual incorrect posts to the bitter end. It's a pattern I have also noticed, although I find this posters positions on some topics to be spot on.

As a movie buff I have seen many of the films you are talking about and they are pretty graphic. But on the whole, I think we could agree that women are portrayed more luridly in film than men despite the examples you pointed out.

I think that if SB had not used an absolute statement predicting the future she would have been better able to make her argument cogent.

[EOTE]

145. That wasn't the point she was trying to make.

She said that those portrayals simply don't exist, not that they're portrayed less frequently. Either way, it's 100% a ludicrous assertion.

[seabeyond]

172. tell me where i am wrong.

because, i really do not see it.

i did not say male on male rape was not on screen. i said they handle the two differently. i said it is not graphic, explicit, drawn out. i still have not seen that. i saw pulp fiction. the scene was short. the rape last seconds. they stayed clothed. and the camera stayed on the faces.

i pulled out the three most current movies so i could get them on imbh? that gives a description. i posted it.

valhalla rising

A rape scene, which is more suggested than shown. In a hallucinatory montage, some of the images appear to show a man on top of another man, who is being pushed into the mud. The rape is not particularly noticeable if you're not aware of it, although is quite clear if you are.

blood and bone ???

Sex & Nudity
None.

the kite runner

There is one scene where a boy is beaten, restrained, and sodomized by a larger bully. It however is depicting more implicitly than graphically.


none of the three even suggest graphic. one even states not graphic.

i called up deliverance and watched the scene. they had the camera mostly on voights face. when they did shoot the rape, it was the rapists face or the victims face. they had cuts to another man standing there. they had cuts on the river and a boat coming up.

the american history. 30 sec. maybe 10 sec of rape. nothing seen but the victim face. then his head is hit on cement

now.... tattoo girl. A man puts his hand down a woman's top and then unzips his trousers. She is made to do oral sex for money. She later washes her mouth out with soap.

The woman goes to his apartment and he punches her, handcuffs her to the bed and strips her. Buttocks and pubic region are seen. He climbs on top and rapes her. Very graphic. This scene lasts for about 2 minutes with screams and strong nudity.

"Such detailed description of Salander’s rape (which, at that point, the reader is all but expecting) makes me wonder if the reader is supposed to be repulsed or titillated. Or, perhaps, both. I’m not suggesting that such description not be included in the book; I’m hardly a fan of censorship and I’ve read my fair share of material both violent and sexual. But when a scene garners so much attention and leads to interviews with Mara Rooney (the American film’s Lisbeth) that barely discuss anything but the rape scene, I start to think, “What’s the point?” Think of the movie Hounddog, which you probably know only as “the Dakota Fanning rape movie.” One of the reasons people were so upset by that was because, somewhere, some scumbag was jerking off to that scene. I certainly don’t think we should let the potential masturbation habits of perverts govern our actions (or else no one would ever make anything or put pictures of themselves on the internet), but in general, what purpose does such a scene serve? Even if Larsson, feminist that he was, meant the scene to highlight the horror of rape, the unfortunate truth is that such a scene might only serve to sexualize a crime that, despite its nature, isn’t rooted in sex at all. "

the american version is said to be even more.....

take the movie, the generals daughter. an excellent movie i would recommend. she is gang raped by the members in her group. they tie her spread eagle on posts. it shows in flash backs. but, nothing explicit or graphic. but a person knows what is happening. kinda like in the male rape movies. BUT, when she plays it out again for her general father. naked now. tied spread eagle. we get lots of shots. she is saying a heartrendering tale of her experience and her father sweeping it under the rug. but while she does this, they sexualize the whole scene. she is discribing a horrendous gang rape as we are seeing a totally sexual scene. body presented perfectly sexualized. oiled body. shots to tittilate. a little nipple her, a little arched flat stomach there.

what the fuck are they doing creating a get the guy hard scene, when she is talking gang rape.


now.... tell me where i am wrong.

[EOTE]

200. If you can't see where you're wrong, you're utterly blind.

Are you being insanely obtuse or are you for real? You said there has never and WILL never be an extended, graphic male rape on screen. You've been shown to be wrong regarding that dozens of times over. I refuse to believe you can be this daft, yet you seem entirely fixed on proving me wrong.

[seabeyond]

201. i wasnt talking to you. i have absolutely no expectation of you... at all. nt

[EOTE]

204. And I have absolutely no expectation to see you tell the truth.

Maybe if you can get through one argument without telling bold faced lies, that will change.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

125. and I quote: "you will NEVER see a graphic, explicit, drawn out scene of male on male rape. never."

The poster below was correct. You're implying that there aren't movies with male-on-male rape, but in other posts, you're talking about how they're not graphic enough. What is it you're wanting to see, exactly, in order to even the score? This knife business sounds pretty brutal to me. To each their own, but I'm not wanting to see anything more graphic than knife rape, irrespective of the genders portrayed.

[Bluenorthwest]

148. Spetters. Caligula.

You are not correct on this. It is less often depicted, perhaps, yet one could argue that with so many of the depictions being 'humor' and prison rape jokes, that the issue of male on male rape is a large one in mass media, and usually poorly dealt with, although is sure as hell is dealt with.

[Hugabear]

128. Don't forget American History X

Very brutal, graphic male-on-male rape scene

[NeedleCast]

91. Deliverence?

Had a quite graphic scene of male on male rape. Just to name one.

[saras]

99. Not so graphic it wasn't shown on television in the early seventies.

[cliffordu]

107. HEAVILY edited

[seabeyond]

105. with todays standard, no, not graphic, which is my point. top 10 horrifying moments

in film history.

deliverance hits number one. i hadnt watched the movie. i watched the scene. not a movie i would watch and yet, the rape is mostly focused on voight. and there is very little seen. again, the horror of it is there, yet it is nothing to todays rape scenes.

it is the NUMBER ONE.... evah.

and it was done in 79. 1979. i see nothing repeating this horror in cinema. to a man. a woman's rape does not even make it on the list.

http://listverse.com/2011/04/22/top-10-horrifying-moments-in-film-history/

again, establishing what i said in my original post. watch the scene again.

done with this.

[redqueen]

112. I love how your comment was twisted...

into your actually wanting to see more men brutalized on film.

I detest intellectual dishonesty.

[EOTE]

114. Intellectual dishonesty?

Like saying that there aren't any truly brutal rapes against men on film? And then when being confronted by dozens of them saying "Well, those aren't really THAT brutal!". Yeah, intellectual dishonesty sickens me as well.

[redqueen]

116. That's more a difference of opinion.

I don't know if she saw the ones you posted, or if she changed her mind about the imbalance, whether perceived or objectively accurate.

My point is the actual dishonesty. Please quote whenever it was that seabeyond said she wanted to see more brutality against men. That is how you characterized her argument, IMO, when you said, "That's not graphic enough for you?"

Having the opinion that there is an imbalance in the way it is portrayed doesn't mean the person wants more. The perception is that the level of detail in the portrayal isn't there, not that it's "not enough."

[EOTE]

118. Actual dishonesty is talking for certain about things which you know nothing about.

That is, without a doubt, what seabeyond is doing here. And even when called out on her absolute bullshit, she still refuses to admit that she's full of it. That goes well beyond mere dishonesty.

[seabeyond]

121. i am saying i want to see more brutal rape of men? or less brutal rape of women? or....

since the only one of these movies i have seen is pulp fiction, i dont want to see any of it.

now

do tell me

about your honesty.

[EOTE]

144. You said those portrayals of rape don't exist.

That is 100% unmitigated bullshit. And you're quite aware of that.

[redqueen]

122. I think you may be talking past each other.

She is referring to the way the rape is presented to the audience, not whether the rapes are brutal or not.

I haven't seen most of the examples you list. I would disagree with her and go out on a limb and say that I imagine at least some of those examples might actually rival the kind of sexualized violence we see against women.

I'm not sure those lists make the case that the incidence of the sexualized portrayal of such violence is about the same for both sexes.

[EOTE]

146. She said that there will NEVER be a graphic, extended male rape scene on film.

I think that I, as well as several others here, exposed that as the blatant lie that it is. You seem to be able to see it as well, but don't go as far to call her out on it. Some people are willing to defend a lie to the bitter end, of course I'm going to call her out on it.

[redqueen]

147. Oh come on.

She obviously can't say that with any seriousness. Nobody can say that about such a subject and expect it to be taken seriously.

Why not discuss the meat of the issue instead of pounding relentlessly on a technicality?

You said it yourself, you called her out on the absolutist language, so did some others. All done now? Can we move on to the actual issue or is the actual issue for you now just based on whether what she claimed was 100% accurate or not?

[EOTE]

154. Then what did she mean by it?

Why say something so incredibly ignorant? Not only will there be, but there already has been, NUMEROUS graphic, extended depictions. She was trying to make a point about how sexist the movie industry is and she failed miserably. If you can't make an argument without lying your ass off, you probably shouldn't be trying to make the argument in the first place.

[EOTE]

156. And regarding the meat of the issue.

I'm not entirely sure what that is, based upon seabeyond's posts. I assume that it's that the movie industry loves to portray female rape in lurid detail and abhors doing the same for men? If that's the actual issue, I don't think that's by any means settled either.

[redqueen]

168. If by 'lurid detail' you mean sexualized, then yes.

Think of that ad which sought to advise women to be careful about getting drunk, because of the threat of rape. Remember how the ad looked? Those legs were sexualized. It wasn't some crime-scene image, those were nice legs, and the underwear was placed just-so, and ... it was sick, really.

That's often how rapes are portrayed on screen. Not as crime scenes, but sexualized. That's the difference between the way men being raped and women being raped is presented on screen. I doubt anyone could find an example of the rape of a man in which it was shown in a sexualized manner. Maybe in some kind of niche porn... I know I sure haven't seen anything like it.

[EOTE]

199. I have never seen a rape on film that I considered to be sexualized, male or female.

Everyone I've seen has been portrayed as a sickening and depraved act, so I can't really imagine that there's a difference in the way they're portrayed via gender.

As for that ad you're referring to, I think it's disgusting, but I still don't consider it to be sexualizing rape. The ad seemed disturbing to me, but not for that reason, it disturbed me because it seemed to be playing victim blaming.

[redqueen]

202. Well that's why you and I

or you and seabeyond, could never agree about this issue. You simply don't see something that that we and others who do see it consider a significant issue.

[EOTE]

205. It doesn't help that when trying to counter an argument, I'm told that I can't take it seriously.

When I respond to a post, I'm generally doing so under the impression that the post I'm responding to is attempting to be honest.

I think that those who do see these rapes as being sexualized may be doing so with filtered vision. On the other end, I think that there are very likely a number of people who would see those male rapes mentioned above as sexualized too, though I'm sure that's not the director's intention.

[redqueen]

206. ?

Where did I say you can't take it seriously? I only said you just aren't seeing what others are seeing, that's it.

If someone thinks that male rapes on film are sexualized, then they're free to say so.

[EOTE]

207. Just a few posts ago:

"She obviously can't say that with any seriousness. Nobody can say that about such a subject and expect it to be taken seriously. "

Well then why would she bother to defend herself so vigorously? If that wasn't the point, she should have said so. Even with the revised goalposts, I still don't agree. I still contend that aside from sick porn, rape is never sexualized on film.

[redqueen]

208. She is talking about sexualization on film.

She hasn't seen it done to men, I haven't seen it either, and you don't think it's ever done to either sex outside of sick porn. This is where most people agree to disagree.

[EOTE]

209. She said graphic and extended. And that is without a doubt untrue.

Sexualization is far more subjective, but once again, I don't believe that, outside of porn and truly fringe films, that there really have been any sexualized portrayals of rape.

On edit: Yes, I agree to disagree in that regard. I don't agree to disagree that there aren't graphic and extended male rapes, I'm glad that you see that as well.

[seabeyond]

120. having seen none of these movies except pulp

and having not heard of most all of them, but deliverance, i went into imbh? to see how graphic, explicit and drawn out the scenes were. i never claimed there was not male rape in film. i claimed that they do not treat male and child rape the same as women's rape.

that simple

and i have yet to see an argument otherwise.

[DFW]

124. Deliverance came pretty close n/t

[daleanime]

135. I have one word for you....

yaoi.



Most of it isn't explicit, but there's more then enough that is.

[tclambert]

137. The rape scene in the Swedish film version was no more graphic than Deliverance

from 1972. It was no less graphic, either. Both scenes were shockingly harsh. And in both cases, the fate of the rapist was graphically presented. The TV series The Shield had a forced male on male oral sex scene that played an important psychological part in subsequent episodes (the victim had the perpetrator murdered). They did use cuts and angles to leave certain parts to the imagination. But so did the film "Girl with the Dragon Tattoo," at least the Swedish one.

I think you have a point, but you're exaggerating it. It is certainly more frequent for filmmakers to show female rapes. And there are weird porno versions that try to make it look like "fun." But somewhere someone has filmed all the most disturbing crap you can think of. (And if you check Rush Limbaugh's DVD collection . . .)

[redqueen]

139. "Fun" aside,

for me, the issue is more the way the woman's body is portrayed. Most of us saw the ad which claimed to be intended to help young women make better decisions about using alcohol. The picture which accompanied the ad showed the woman's legs in a sexualized manner. It is this sexualized portrayal of rape, along with the incidence of it, is the most disturbing issue, for me.

[Gabi Hayes]

173. not much of a burroughs fan, I'd guess. that said,

I agree with you on the rest. didn't read the book...gave it to my sister for Xmas. she hated it, put it down

saw the movie earlier this year, and it blew, for lots of reasons, a major one of which was the excessively drawn out rape/blowjob scenes

[boppers]

193. Well, this response started a lot of pointless dithering over hyperbole.

Gut check: using "NEVER" or "ALWAYS" or other absolutist generalizations does not advance a non-linear, textual, discussion.

Oh, and have a google hit:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100817144616AAJxEyc

It might look familiar.

[seabeyond]

197. please point out where i said there was not male on male rape in film.

sleeper

A guard forces a young boy to undress completely in front of him (no nudity).

A guard forces a young boy to perform oral sex on him. The camera cuts away before anything explicit is shown.

It is heavily implied that several guards rape 4 young boys several times throughout the movie. At one point the guards lead them all down a dark hallway to rape them. The boys are shirtless and the guards make disturbing references to what is about to happen.

Black and white flashback scenes showing guards raping and abusing young boys but nothing explicit is shown, but the scene is still very disturbing.

__________________

take note, not explicit. not graphic. not long drawn out rape

not sexualized

that is the point

[redqueen]

203. Regarding the duration of the scenes...

that's a distinction that would be hard to miss. I wonder if there's been research done on that already.

[boppers]

224. Just saw the original GWtDT movie.

The most prolonged rape scene, with the most graphic action, is the anal rape, and tattoo torture, of a naked, tied and bound man, by a woman.

[JustAnotherGen]

65. I don't know if it 'glorified' rape per se

But I'm just done with violence without reason in fiction.

The first book (I got half way through before I was thoroughly nauseated at the content) - was supposed to be entertaining mind candy (per the people who recommended it to me). If I want that I'll read a Grisham or Patterson novel. The author is half the story teller of those two.


I've also found people that find the heroine 'awesome' because she is a 'strong female figure'.

But what did she have to ENDURE to get there. . . Compare her with Bone in Bastard Out of Carolina. Or better yet - read We Were the Mulvaneys or Rape: A Love Story by Joyce Carol Oates.

Any of those three give real 'insight' to what happens to women who experience brutal sexual violence.

This book is a 'great fantasy' - but again - I found the story slow moving, and it did not engage.

[redqueen]

68. ( Spoiler below ) I don't know how anyone can think of that book

as in any way feminist.

That's the power of PR, I guess. Oh, and women who enacts violent revenge... apparently that's somehow feminist.

Spoiler: And this woman gets a boob job and calls it the best present she ever gave herself. Really? This is the strong feminist character? Seriously?

GMAFB.

[seabeyond]

72. Oh, and women who enacts violent revenge... apparently that's somehow feminist.

i have heard this repeatedly and i dont get this either. i have never found vengeance to be healing and i have heard much of du protest that same argument. and the cheers for the horrid she does to him generally have the men on du outraged. none of it makes sense to me.

thru out the books and series shows a man writing that is clueless what female struggle is. he may try, but he is off the mark repeatedly.

[redqueen]

80. Yeah, sexualized violence isn't my thing,

not even when it's pseudo-feminist.

[truebrit71]

149. I think that spoiler part was just another sign of the main character's overall confusion...

...about her own sexuality...she clearly can't handle relationships, and sex appears to be purely for the physical release rather than any real sort of emotional need...

She isn't a feminist in the "I'm not shaving my pits or my legs/burn my bra/all men are pigs" sense for sure, but rather in the sense that even though people have used her, or discounted her because of her gender she is still held in high regard by the intelligent men in her world that don't care about her physical appearance...Lisbeth herself clearly doesn't give a fuck what anyone thinks of her, male or female, but she is emotionally damaged everytime she feels rejected...I think her attitude and her unwillingness to compromise makes her a strong female person, whether that makes her a 'feminist' or not I am not qualified to judge...

[Moonwalk]

170. A Feminist is one who shaves her pits and calls men pigs?

Stereotype much?

A feminist is someone who wants fairness; women allowed to hold the jobs they can hold, not discriminated against because of their gender, given the same money for those jobs as men. Feminists are also interested in child care, women's health (insurance for little blue pills rather than abortions), and, yes, women's issues like rape. They are, if true feminists, as interested in gender equality for men as for women, and against rape period.

That is a feminist. That this character may be a strong female character doesn't necessarily make her a feminist. it is, after all, the man who gives her a job, and teaches her how to love again--she doesn't do that on her own. And that need for the man to achieve pride and restoration is what would make her less than feminist.

[boppers]

190. If a woman helped her "achieve pride and restoration", would that be different in your eyes?

Why does it "need" to be a man (your word) rather than "happens to be a man"?

[truebrit71]

214. The "stereotype" i was referring to was the Andrew Dworkin "all sex is rape" type of radical...

..

[Dorian Gray]

70. I don't see how it glorifies rape

it makes it seem pretty horrific, if I remember. (And I am not a fan of the books.)

[truebrit71]

150. It doesn't, in any way, shape or form...

...it's funny how some are fixated on this one part of the book, when the overall story is so much more interesting and actually even more disturbing...

[seabeyond]

153. except in my original statement i did not focus just on the rape

i mentioned male fantasy (all the hot young women with sexual abuse history after him), rape, presenting it as a feminist book, poor writing, doing poorly when it came out they had to give it away, his dying made it popular and media hype sold it.

i dont see how you can honestly say, all i did was focus on the rape.

[truebrit71]

159. I wasn't referring to you specifically, but rather others that jumped on your bandwagon...

...I am still unsure how you see this a 'male fantasy', I don't think it was a 'feminist book', but a book that had an emotionally scarred female lead role who was also very intelligent, highly capable, and used other's disdain for her as a source of power...that may, or may not make her a 'feminist'...

I don't speak or read Swedish so I can't properly judge whether it was written well in it's native tongue, but there is a quirkiness about the translation that I find strangely appealing in the same way that I fine the whole Scandinavian/Nordic persona (if there is such a thing) as being interesting in the 'Wallander' series..

I think it is a dark book about a dark and disturbing subject written without pretense or bullshit that captures the essence of the many varied characters involved.

You see it differently.

Fair enough.

[seabeyond]

161. Fair enough.

absolutely. i think how they portrayed the middle age man (especially in swedish version, mediocre at best) as a hot chick magnetic and everything about him poses a sexist bent to it as they try to create it as pro female empowered, while it came nowhere close to that in my estimation.

the person explains how i see the rape. this is far from the only person expressing this. sexualizing a rape.

"What is really gnawing at me about this film is whether or not it is okay to portray a supposedly feminist character and tell a feminist story through the vein of violence against women. Because when you take away all the bells and whistles, all of the things about the Lisbeth character that cause our knee-jerk reaction to be “Feminist!” the story itself is just more media-created violence against women. For example, Lisbeth is physically assaulted in the subway within the first 30 minutes of the film. Then graphically assaulted by her legal guardian/parole officer TWICE in what could arguably be one of the worst rape scenes since Leaving Las Vegas. These two scenes (plus, the revenge rape scene where she attacks her attacker) truly test the boundary of rape fantasy; it is very unclear to me when it starts to become something that is used for titillation as opposed to activism, and that cannot be good. Furthermore, the main plot mystery is driven by a sadist, misogynist, serial killing, rapist Nazi who has been murdering women for the better part of 40 years. Pictures & flash-backs of those gratuitously violent murders are scattered throughout the entire film (and, from what I understand described in all-too-much detail in the novel).

Larsson – the book’s author – founded the Expo-foundation, “a group intended on exposing neo-Nazi activity in Sweden.” He was known for his “pre-occupation” with misogyny and racism, and spent his life fighting against these things, as well as capitalism. I wish that I could say with his beliefs he created a character and a series of stories & films that are worthy of feminist praise and accolades. But, I am afraid all that exists in this story is rape fantasy and the kinds of violence that the feminist community is fighting to rid the media and, possibly more importantly, society as a whole of. Additionally, Larsson wrote our feminist heroin as having a great amount of disdain for her body, and the sequel to Dragon Tattoobegins with Lisbeth getting breast implants. I’m not sure what kind of feminist heroin Larsson was trying to create, but we can thank Niels Arden Oplev, the films director, for ditching those crappy & oh-so-feminist story-lines.

To sum it up….Lisbeth is a great, strong female character. We need more characters like her. We need them to inspire the ferocious, feral spirit that lives in all women. But, what we don’t need are more morally ambiguous, violent stories that are held on their axis by the portrayal of a form of violence against women that borders on sexualizing it."

http://www.feministfatale.com/2010/04/the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-rape-fantasy/

But then there’s the rape. Given that this is a book primarily about abuse and rape, it would be strange if neither were discussed. The book’s treatment of rape, however, left me confused. Salander’s boss has feelings both paternal and sexual for her, and that attitude seems to be shared by every male in the book. He describes her multiple times as the “perfect victim.” The books contains a graphic rape scene that’s upsetting…to which I say, well, of course. As normal, non-psychopathic human beings, we should be upset and shaken by descriptions of rape. Yet (and perhaps this is a gross double standard), I see a huge difference between Alice Sebold (a rape victim herself) describing a rape in The Lovely Bones and a man describing the brutal and graphic rape of the “perfect victim.” The very phrase “perfect victim”

Such detailed description of Salander’s rape (which, at that point, the reader is all but expecting) makes me wonder if the reader is supposed to be repulsed or titillated. Or, perhaps, both. I’m not suggesting that such description not be included in the book; I’m hardly a fan of censorship and I’ve read my fair share of material both violent and sexual. But when a scene garners so much attention and leads to interviews with Mara Rooney (the American film’s Lisbeth) that barely discuss anything but the rape scene, I start to think, “What’s the point?” Think of the movie Hounddog, which you probably know only as “the Dakota Fanning rape movie.” One of the reasons people were so upset by that was because, somewhere, some scumbag was jerking off to that scene. I certainly don’t think we should let the potential masturbation habits of perverts govern our actions (or else no one would ever make anything or put pictures of themselves on the internet), but in general, what purpose does such a scene serve? Even if Larsson, feminist that he was, meant the scene to highlight the horror of rape, the unfortunate truth is that such a scene might only serve to sexualize a crime that, despite its nature, isn’t rooted in sex at all.

http://welcometoladyville.wordpress.com/2011/12/15/the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo/

[boppers]

191. "feminist heroin"..... Interesting typo.

Well, that opens a whole new chain of thought, doesn't it?

In some ways, it seems to fit. It's a dark reversal of power-plays, an inversion of bodice-ripper fiction, and just as realistic.

[polly7]

189. Have you read the books?

[truebrit71]

90. That is absolute bollocks..

...it is/does neither...

[stockholmer]

160. they did not change the title here from "Män som hatar kvinnor", and the books were a splash hit for

Nordstedts (the publisher) from the beginning. As far as the rest of your opinions, your are entitled to them, but, as we say, jag skitar i vad du sager.

[Nye Bevan]

3. Based upon what Lisbeth does to her rapist, I would say empowering (nt)

[Odin2005]

6. Yep.

[alittlelark]

13. +1000

[riderinthestorm]

40. You are back!! How is your son??!!

You left us all wondering how things are going with you and your son. What was the final answer on his leg?

[alittlelark]

43. It appears to be a non-ossifying fibroma, but we need to

have it re-checked next month.

Hopefully we will not need a biopsy.


Thanks for thinking about us - I think I posted on the last day of the old DU.

[riderinthestorm]

44. Is that serious?

I don't know anything about this. I think you did post on DU2's last day. You should know that your post touched a fair few people in the lounge and your name has come up a couple of times as people have been thinking of you....

(((hug)))

You may want to post an update in the lounge. You have been missed....

[alittlelark]

46. We don't really know how serious it is.

His pediatrician saw the report and said all was well, the orthopedist said it looked OK. The radiologist told us to come back next month.

I'm doing better, I'm just breathing.

He grew 1" last month.

[riderinthestorm]

48. I can't find the smilies link yet on DU3

But please know that you have a lot of good wishes speeding your way.....

Have a great holiday season and hope you can just relax and enjoy the season without too much worry and stress.... Sounds like your son is in a holding pattern for now.

Again, a big ((((hug))))

[alittlelark]

51. Neither can I !

I have been too embarrassed to ask!

We'll be spending the holiday in NM. Luminarias, red chili, green chili, Xmas style, pinion smoke....

It's all good.

Thank You for your good wishes.

[Mira]

76. Farrah Fawcett in "Extremities" comes to mind n/t

[trumad]

12. empowering for sure

Lisbeth was one bad ass lady.

[firehorse]

16. Her type of female archetype is lacking in fiction - for that alone its empowering.

Not every woman on planet earth aspires to be a blow up doll like the kardashians. Too bad there are not more Lizbeths in fiction. She's a hacker, she's got a mohawk wears punk clothes, rides a motorcycle and at about 100 pounds can kick the ass of two bikers. She's self sufficient and has a strong sense of justice. These traits are "cool" when its old Clint Eastwood movies or in Samuri movies, its refreshing that finally in this decade a female can have these traits too especially when living in an era of extreme makeover and Housewives of Orange County, kardashians, etc.

And on another level, some statistics say 1 out of 3 women have been raped and or physically attacked by the men in their life. Very few of these attacks are reported or justice served. Lizbeth's character acts out a revenge fantasy that a lot of victims have, and in so viewers watching / reading that kind of fantasy -- it can be very validating, healing, to those who have been victimized.

[Burgman]

18. Said better than I could have.

I have a sister who was raped and can only imagine.

Lisbeth was a refreshing character in today's fictional climes.

[eridani]

35. She's also a bisexual Aspie

At least in the books, her difficulty in making social connenctions with other people is well portrayed. I liked the math and the hacking as well.

[Whisp]

41. I admired Lizbeth very much.

For the reasons you state. There aren't many roles for women like this and I really appreciated that. The rape part, well as you said again, that happens a lot in real life. I did not find it to be gratuitous in the film - it was for a realistic measure of what misery the poor woman had to put up with and how the system takes advantage. I don't believe it was included just to get some men horny but to want to gut the rapist with your bare hands.

[mainer]

61. Do you read much thriller fiction?

Good grief, Lisbeth types are all over the genre! I don't get why everyone says Lisbeth is such an original character when I can point to many other writers who have similar kick-ass females. It just tells me people don't read much. To say that women are blow-up doll characters in fiction is ignoring the fact that female writers have taken over the genre.

I recommend you try Taylor Stevens (THE INFORMATIONIST) and you'll see a real kick-ass heroine.

[NashVegas]

151. La Femme Nikita, Anyone?

Not only are there tons of great women in literature, but in the movies, too, if you know where to look.

[mainer]

169. Precisely. Anyone who says characters like Lisbeth are "unique" isn't reading much these days.

It's like hearing blind people suddenly say, "Wow! I've just discovered that strong women exist!"

Where have they been during the past 20 years of literature?

I can't tell you how many people mooned over how "Da Vinci Code" was so LITERATE. Usually they were people who hadn't read a book in a decade, and this "discovery" made them think they'd had some amazing revelation.

[Gabi Hayes]

177. really....familiar with any of these:

Cayce Pollard, Chevette Washington, Molly Millions (Sally Shears), Angie Mitchell, Hollis Henry, among others?

[boppers]

192. Da Vinci Code made me twitch. A lot. Not in good ways.

Turns out that if you take existing great literature, and re-write it for a seventh grade reading/plot comprehension level, you can make an awful lot of money.

That being said, it's been going on much longer than 20 years.... my first "Kick-ass, self sufficient, uber-woman" novel that I read was some sci-fi-trashy I picked up in 1985 or so, (it was written in 1982)... http://tinyurl.com/4v8txh

Here's another touchstone of mine, from the 4th grade:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Women

This issue of real powerful, women, in literature, is a wee bit older than 20 years.

[firehorse]

213. Originally I typed La Femme Nakita and ... tank girl and cat woman. But I erased them, because they

are not as developed of characters as Lisbeth.

I enjoyed the french version of La Femme Nakita, its been more than a decade since I saw it. But as I recall she was stereotypically beautiful and her character didn't have too much depth or complexity. I like tank girl too, but its more cartoon like cat woman. Even cat woman operates on a level where she's acting out without a lot of character development.

[NashVegas]

223. Nikita (My misspelling)

I think my recollection of her looks and yours differ. Not that she was ugly, but pretty rough around the edges.

Catwoman's an interesting comparison. Character development depends on which actress. I grew up watching Eartha Kitt & Julie Newmar but Michelle Pfeiffer owned it in every sense. I haven't bothered to see any updates since then.

Lisbeth has the benefit of having not only a full book, but three! to give people an idea what she's about.

I didn't see the Swedish films. Not really interested in seeing this one. I'm old. Graphic violence used to bore me in films but nowadays it's repellent. I sat through The Horsemen the other night and found myself wondering if it wasn't a snuff flick.

[firehorse]

225. I read the books and saw the swedish films.... the swedish casting was refreshing.

None of the actors had plastic surgery. This seems like a weird thing to say, but adults were allowed to look like adults aging gracefully and for that alone it was deeply refreshing.

I'm not so interested in seeing the American version.

Regarding Catwoman, Tank girl and Nikita... true Lisbeth has 3 books, but in every book there is some kind of turning point in her character and obstacle she has to face and overcome, with huge personal sacrifices.

Catwoman's psychology seems like some man burned her so she's going to act out the same revenge fantasy over and over again, without her character changing from the beginning of the book till the end. I could go on and on about the turning points, regressions, but ultimate character developments lisbeth goes through. For me that was really the hook of the stories, not Bloomquist and all the rest.

[firehorse]

218. I read a lot of fiction but the female characters often lack complexity and development in the arch

of their character.

I'll look into Taylor Stevens, thanks.

I've read a lot of thriller fiction, but often the female protagonist is lacking in depth and development of character compared to her supporting "cast". I seek out books/movies that have strong female characters. And I've never come across a character as satisfying as lisbeth.

I could write pages about the few female characters that make the list, but even with those characters its just never quite satisfying because of the lack of depth and overall arch development of the character. Doesn't matter if we are talking about Kay Scarpetta and her niece, Bonnie of Bonnie and Clyde, Tank Girl, Cat Woman, the female characters of the show LOST, Carol O' Connell's: Mallory (she comes close to Lisbeth)... there is always something just not quite satisfying. It's like the author starts out with a half baked archetype but in the end the character can't overcome or fulfill her destiny in any meaningful way.

Lisbeth seems to combine them all and work out their unresolved character problems. Mallory is a survivor of childhood severe abuse and it turned her into sociopath police woman in a way that character is similar to Lisbeth - they both are hackers - but there is a depth and soul to Lisbeth and the reader feels deep validation with lisbeth that isn't matched with Mallory.

Most female heroes are tend to be beautiful (bonnie and clyde) in a way that fulfills most male's fantasies. Lisbeth could make efforts (she does at one point but its more about shifting identities, but for the most part she stays true to herself. That is very liberating for all the women out there that feel fine not having breast implants, or growing their hair long and bleaching it, or to the girls who don't own high heels but prefer boots and motorcycle jackets.

We need more of this female archetype in our culture to balance out all the desperate housewives, housewives of orange country, kardashians, etc, etc. For many Lisbeth is as refreshing as drinking water after a 40 year drought.

[redqueen]

101. "it can be very validating, healing, to those who have been victimized"

I'd be interested to see a survey of rape victims, to find out if they find such content healing, or if they find it disturbing, triggering, etc.

[tammywammy]

20. I've only heard positive comments about the books, though I haven't read them myself. n/t

[XemaSab]

21. The first book made me very uncomfortable

I felt like it was trying to be anti-sexist, but instead wound up being kinda sexist.

For example, the main character's treatment of women left something to be lacking. It seemed like the other side of the coin from the dude who was going around killing women.

[Burgman]

27. I can certainly see that.

I think that was Larrson's intention. Both hero and heroine were riddled with faults just as (at least) I am. In the overall tone, I didn't see it becoming sexist but that may simply be because of my personal POV.

[eridani]

36. I liked the portrayal of Erica Berger

I like seeing successful polyamory in fiction.

[eridani]

39. I liked that he managed to stay friends with former lovers

He had no trouble dealing with rejection. In real life, there are plenty of people who always fall in like with others, but never in love.

[SecurityManager]

26. I heard it will be graphically gory?

I can take gore from sci fi (Fincher Alien 3)

But I hate gore in crime movies.

[valerief]

28. I saw the original movie. I thought it was gross. Depravity is gross, not entertaining. nt

[TreasonousBastard]

30. I enjoyed the books and the three Swedish movies. I'll probably...

enjoy the new one, too.

I guess you could look at the trilogy as one huge revenge fantasy, and the characters may not have been all that sympathetic to an audience not terribly interested in anyone not perfect in their eyes, but these were just the first of many books Larssen planned while exploring Lisbeth Salander's life and growth. Who knows where things would have led? Personally, I found her one of the more fascinating characters in fiction and would really have liked to follow her adventures.

Yeah, lots of violence, but violence exists in the real world, too, and it's not like we've never made movies about it. Sex, too.

Objections? Yeah, with all the publicity this will attract people who just have to complain and a lot of people just won't like it because it's the kind of thing they don't like. But to just toss out kneejerk complaints about sexism or any other -isms is just silly. Wanna complain about this stuff, go find "Salo" or any slasher flick and make your case.

[redqueen]

102. People can complain about whatever they like.

Believe it or not, you don't get to pick and choose for them.

http://tigerbeatdown.com/2010/07/29/the-girl-with-the-lots-of-creepy-disturbing-torture-that-pissed-me-off-on-stieg-larsson/

[TreasonousBastard]

184. True. And I can call silly whatever I like. I can also note that often...

complaints can tell more about the complainer than the thing complained about.

[Burgman]

185. While I may disagree with it, WHAT A GREAT REVIEW to read!

Tongue in cheek doesn't even cover it. 'd hate to have that reviewer mad at me, she could skewer me with her wits alone.

[boppers]

194. +1

Good read, agreed.

[riderinthestorm]

32. She's clearly an Aspie, I thought it was empowering for THAT

I am really sensitive to gender issues but was more thrilled at how an obvious Aspie (Aspergers) is so fully empowered in the book.

Lisbeth is soooo strong as a woman I never thought of her being exploited. In fact, her whole raison d'etre is how she fights back and fights back. And wins!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

37. for the most part i like the book, but i think having sexual violence to prove how strong a female

is, is unnecessary

[riderinthestorm]

45. I think that including sexual violence, especially for women ensnared in social services

in any country, would be mandatory. The stats are horrific for those who are caught in that world. Sexual violence against women as a stand alone statistic is much too high (1 in 3 women? 1 in 4 women? Whichever study you choose to believe, it's all bad). But for women involved in social services are a certain kind of prey and I didn't think Larson's portrayal of that situation would have been credible if he hadn't been honest about ALL aspects of being in those systems.....

[mentalsolstice]

42. I didn't think it was exploitive.

I've worked closely with rape survivors and it didn't bother me in the least. For those who put the first book down without reading the whole thing, I can understand why the first 100-200 pages may not have gripped you. I found myself slogging through it. However, it picks up after that, and the 2nd and 3rd books start off fast and continue with a very quick pace. I've told plenty of friends that they can enjoy the 2nd book without having read the first. However, the 2nd book is pretty critical to understanding the 3rd. I've told other friends this book can be a big hit or miss, and to do whatever is most comfortable for them. I would not judge anyone's intelligence by whether or not they read and finished this, and certainly would not use it for discerning whether or not they are edumacated.

My husband has about 150 pages left to read in the 1st book. No, it doesn't read as a rape fantasy to him. In fact, that part was disturbing for him, but he understood why it was in there to develop Lisbeth's character. However, he's enthralled by the story and the character development, so it's a page-turner for him. We plan to see the movie during our holiday vacation.

I recently finished "We Need to Talk About Kevin". It's film counterpart is coming out in January, with some amazingly talented actors. That is one really disturbing book, it certainly creeped me out more than "Dragon Tattoo." As unsettling as the book was, I look forward to seeing the movie as well. I guess I like being challenged by hard-to-like characters in difficult situations.

[Liquorice]

49. I loved the trilogy, but haven't seen the film. If it follows the tone of the books, it won't

be exploitive at all. I've thought about seeing the movie, but the way the violent scenes are depicted in the movie may not be something I want to see. I don't like watching really graphic violence.

[aletier_v]

50. I feel asleep during the 1st movie.

[saras]

52. Both, at the same time, because all women are not the same.

Anything that's empowering to the violent, male or female, is exploitative of the rest, male or female.

[Are_grits_groceries]

55. If you are bothered by the graphic nature of the rape scenes,

then you felt a fraction of what a victim feels. People don't understand that rape isn't about sex. It's about power and the forcible use of sex to use that power over the victims. Unfortunately, that power can keep a hold for years.

Is what happened farfetched? No. Rape survivors have gone through much worse at times. Some are held for hours and raped repeatedly. People who work with survivors or are involved in catching and prosecuting sex crimes can tell stories that would curl your hair at the very least.

These books use one of the more gruesome depiction of rape. When portrayed in other books, it is usually a much more cleaned up scene. If it bothered you, good! It should, but not because he dared to make it graphic. He dared to make it realistic and representative of some rapes.

This society ignores or refuses to understand anything to do with sex including rape and abuse. People don't want to talk about it or deal with it. Because of that, the crimes are never fully understood and many falsehoods take hold.

Read some transcripts of some trials. Those will make you discomfited and disturbed. They are boiled down to the stark reality. Larsson just put it in a book.

[LadyHawkAZ]

56. I liked the way Lisbeth was portrayed in Dragon Tattoo

although the opening of the second book was so triggering that I had to stop reading, and have only managed to finish book 1.

I would say about 75% empowering/25% exploitative.

The story itself was meh- not bad but not great either.

[retread]

59. Torture porn. n/t

[Bucky]

62. I liked the first movie, but the 3rd was boring.

The cops outnumbered the bad guys 20 to 1 and the villains were so lame that, at one point, the sum total of their threat to the hero consisted of throwing a brick through his sister's window.

The only decent bad guy was a German. Apparently the Swedes are so genetically and culturally altruistic that they have import their villains. Geeze, what happened to Sweden? Back when they were Vikings they were such badasses.

[Johonny]

66. Not a holiday movie, nor does 9-11 put me in the holiday mood

nor alien invasion, action packed spy movies, WWI flicks... wtf happen to those feel good lame ass holiday movies with Dorris Day.

[Dorian Gray]

69. The books were overrated

pulp fiction.

I'm interested in seeing the film, though.

[Gabi Hayes]

178. saw the swedish version. saw the trailer at the movies:

if you like LOUD LOUDer LOUDest, graphic, in your face action, you'll like this

bombastic drivel

[Taverner]

84. The book was good storytelling

And not every movie that has rape in it is exploitative of women.

[marlakay]

85. I like the books and the movies

saw the swedish version and going to see the english one tonight. I guess I like that she fights back. As a woman sometimes we are weak and have no choice but to let things happen to us. I am not a real strong person so for me it makes me think if I had the strength would I fight back?

[mimitabby]

86. exploitative

the book really bugged me for all that rape creepy stuff.
I did not really enjoy it. why can't someone write a book without escalating horror...

[Whisp]

95. I thought Lisbeth was always the smartest and toughest person in the room

She sure did get a bad deal out of the system but she came out of it all as an extraordinary strong woman.

I see that the rape scene can make one very uncomfortable tho. But I don't see it as being exploitive in this particular movie.

[pscot]

100. My personal heroine

for the 21st century: wicked smart, deeply alienated and takes no shit from anyone. I thought the Swedes did a great job on the films.

[Whisp]

103. I can't think of a comparable American heroine like she is.

I'm sure there must be a few that may come close but I can't think of any right now with that kind of grit.

[emulatorloo]

111. You might like Carole O'Connell's series featuring Kathy Mallory

To me there are lots of similarities between the two characters. The books are really well written.

[Whisp]

127. Thanks, wrote that down. nt

[mainer]

126. Try a few of these authors for strong heroines:

Zoe Sharp
JT Ellison
Taylor Stevens
JA Konrath
Nevada Barr
Sara Paretsky

[Whisp]

129. I thank you too.

I did have in mind American film but I see how that was misunderstood.

[mainer]

136. best recent kick-ass female in american film

"Salt" with Angelina Jolie.

But you see a lot of them on TV too. Check out Jane Rizzoli on "Rizzoli & Isles." She'll beat any perp to the ground.

[Whisp]

198. oh, just recalled Eon Flux with Charlize Theron.

Thats a great one too.

[emulatorloo]

134. Have read Paretsky and Barr, they are great

Thanks for posting those other authors, will check them out.

[Marrah_G]

217. There are plenty of books out there that are not dark

[Time for change]

87. I liked all three books a lot

It was largely my admiration for the main female character that generated my interests in the books.

Given that, it's difficult for me to understand how the books could be considered exploitive of women. I certainly did not think that the books glorified rape. To the contrary, they showed a woman who resisted it with every bit of cunning she had and gave back as good as she got.

[BlueMTexpat]

89. I loved the series.

Did the books need some editing? Yes. Had Larsson lived long enough to work with an editor, I think that there could have been a lot of improvement. I understand that there was generally hesitation to edit the books simply because he had died so suddenly and, with the friction between his long-time live-in lover and his semi-estranged family who inherited his estate because he died intestate, there was literally no one to work with.

The original title of the first book was "Men Who Hate Women" and that theme certainly carries through the series even though there are also some very enlightened male characters as well, so yes, I believe that Lisbeth is empowerment embodied. Her talents are also underestimated by the same men who "hate" women.

I also have all three of the films in Swedish (with English subtitles) and thought that for the most part, they did justice to the series. Obviously, there were situations from the books that were elided or ignored altogether in the films, but the gist was there.

For anyone who is interested, I recommend the following article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/oct/04/stieg-larsson-partner-eva-gabrielsson?INTCMP=SRCH

[TBF]

119. Agree with these thoughts on the books -

I thought it was a great series but have not seen the movies yet. There certainly was a lot of violence, but folks who have worked in the mental health field can tell you it is not so far-fetched. I worked in a facility many years ago and would simply cry when I heard what some of the folks had gone through - very eye opening.

[randome]

96. Exploitive.

Guys like action babes these days. And some, sorry to say, like the idea of rape.

[Whisp]

104. 'action babes?'

I don't have to go any further....



*horks

[Hulk]

97. I liked all three movies, and all three books.

I'd say some folks have some sexual hang-ups on these threads. Violent, revolting at times; but suspenseful, intertwining plots and damn good acting. It gives a peek into a dark world that does exist in some places in YOUR neighborhood, more than likely, although we all hope not.

There aer much worse stories and movies, to be sure. This one is awful in parts, but it is fiction, based on some terrible realities in life. There are sicko's among us.

I enjoy foreign films, if for nothing else, than to see foreign lands and get a glimpse of what life is like besides in Wyoming, or Idaho. Wake up people. It's fiction. If it makes you sick..then don't watch it. I thought they were all extremely suspenseful and well made; and the books were even worth reading after/before watching the movies, as there are parts missing from the movies that give a deeper insight into the plots.

P.S. I am NOT a violent person, have never been or never plan to be a rapist or sadist; but that isn't my focus when watching or reading such matter.

[randome]

98. And yet your username is 'Hulk'.

{Insert smilie here.}

[boppers]

195. You wouldn't like him when he's angry.

.....So don't make him angry.

[rhett o rick]

133. Well said. nm

[LanternWaste]

141. Easiest conclusion for us to make when confronted by opinions different than our own

"I'd say some folks have some sexual hang-ups on these threads..."

Easiest conclusion for us to make when confronted by opinions different than our own-- we may conveniently blame it on an ambiguous and noticeably undefined "hang-up" held by someone else, thus more efficiently invalidating conclusions other than own.

Human nature being what it is...

[tclambert]

130. Setting people on fire might be offensive to others.

It is not exactly a kid's movie. You don't want them getting ideas.

It's like a really cruel episode of Criminal Minds set in Sweden, where no one expects serial killers.

[rhett o rick]

132. I have read the books and seen the Swedish movies and loved them all.

I am anxious about the new version.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

138. Saw the trilogy, did not read the books

Not being a woman, I have no idea whether they are empowering or not. I see Lisabeth as a strong character, however.

I have to admit, I'm always taken aback when people say it "glorifies" rape. Movies, literature, art.....are reflections of culture. Not every aspect of books or film are meant to be "entertaining" but to illicit a reaction or feeling over the course of a story that adds texture and context to it. It amazes me how many so-called liberal people here are really no better than the Christo-fascists like Michael Medved who dismiss movies with too much swearing, violence, etc without looking at the greater picture. Instead they dwell on the small handful of sickos who find it "exciting" or "entertaining". They punish the art for the reaction of a few crazies.

If literature and film are truly to be a mirror held up to our society, are we going to deny rape exists and not portray it in film or in print? Especially since many of these same posters point out on a daily basis that it actually lurks around every corner?

[redqueen]

140. It's not the portrayal itself,

but the nature of the portrayal which can be problematic.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

142. Neither. Sometimes a movie is just a movie.

[ThomWV]

143. I saw part of the original film, I thought it was thinly disguised porn and walked out.

There was no story, poor acting, and then utterly unnecessary sexual content nonstop right from the beginning and after about 20 minutes I just walked out of the room. It was pure garbage.

[Burgman]

152. Interesting.

There was a story, the actors did their jobs well according to most (Especially Noomi Rapace) and the sexual content all played very much into the storyline.

Larsson tackled some uncomfortable paradigms and handled them pretty well in my own opinion.

[a la izquierda]

158. I loved the books and the Swedish films.

I'm torn about seeing the American versions.

I love Scandinavian murder mysteries, they're so dark and weird.

[sendero]

165. It's a work of fiction.

.... it's neither.

Not every film, book, story, song or painting has to have either an empowering or exploitative message. For fuck's sake.

[Burgman]

167. I would tend to disagree.

As an author I would tend to believe that the lion's share of fiction IS intended to have a message, usually empowering to the reader.

[indivisibleman]

174. The book was fascinating and moved quickly.

I loved both the book and the film. The film isn't as close to the book as I would like it to be. The movies gloss over some things that people need to know to better understand the story. But the first film was terrific and I felt it was very empowering to women.
It was a difficult film to watch and I had to look away during one of the rape scenes. The story is Hitchcockian to my viewing and very scary.
The second film was a big let down as they didn't cover the book very well.
I am looking forward to the American version to see if they can make it even better.

[DevonRex]

211. Saw it last night. It's really good.

Might be hard to follow if a person hasn't read the books. My son asked questions a couple of times during the movie. But as soon as I answered he understood what was going on. Not like he was totally lost or anything.

It follows the book very closely, so it's complicated. Gets all the subplots in there.

[truebrit71]

212. I did too.. it was bloody brilliant...

...quite a faithful adaptation of the book, the woman that played Lisbeth was superb, Daniel Craig beautifully under-stated in the role...cinematography was excellent...i really enjoyed it...I am not going to lie, it was intense and brutal in parts, but so was the book...but I will definitely be going to see this again on the big screen...

I was/am so ingrossed in the books that i didn't think to look at it from the perspective of someone that has never read the books, but I think the plot(s) are simple enough to pick up on...

I highly recommend it...but be warned, if you are squeamish, there are going to be some uncomfortable moments for you...

[Politicub]

175. Neither - it's just a really fun read

And great for passing time while flying.

[canoeist52]

176. More about Stieg Larsson

I loved the three books and the Swedish movies. There is conspiracy, corporate greed, Asberger's syndrome, legal rights and a glimpse into Swedish life (they drink a lot of coffee ) as well as rape and murder. I
f you want to know more about the author. Here's a link

http://www.stieglarsson.com/
"Before his career as a writer, Stieg Larsson was mostly known for his struggle against racism and right-wing extremism. Starting in the late 1970's, he combined his work as a graphic designer with holding lectures on right-wing extremism for the Scotland Yard. During the following years he became an expert on the subject and has held many lectures as well as written many novels on the subject. In 1995, when 8 persons were killed by neo-Nazis I Sweden, he was the main force behind the founding of the Expo-foundation, a group intended on exposing neo-Nazi activity in Sweden. From 1999 and on, he was appointed chief editor of the magazine Expo.

During the last 15 years of his life, he and his life companion Eva Gabrielsson lived under constant threat from right-wing violence."

[Moonwalk]

179. The Question is Problematic--There are Three Aspects to Consider...

First, the heroine. I would say she is not a feminist/empowering heroine per say because she falls into that stereotype. Which is that a brainy woman is going to be a cold, hard, angry woman. That is not feminist or empowering because it is an old stereotype used by men and women to imply that women who are smart aren't real women. They can't be kind, empathetic, nurturing, etc. They are "unnatural."

An empowering woman would be smart without having to be cold, hard, angry. Of course, the answer (excuse?) to that is that she's damaged. But that also raises questions: is she a realistic depiction of a strong woman survivor of rape (etc.) or is she a fantasy version--meaning a Red Sonja who, having been gang raped takes up a sword (but wouldn't otherwise), a female Batman who become a superhero to avenge wrongs done to her? If she is a fantasy version, is that more or less empowering than a real story about a real rape survivor? Would our heroine be what she is without the rape? If not, then she's even more problematic. We think it heroic for a man to run into a burning building to save a stranger--not because of any personal need or desire, but because that's what a hero does--but our heroine is involved in all this out of a desire for revenge and a need for personal catharsis. That's not heroic (to be fair, many male heroes have this same problem, that they must do what they do out of vengeance or because it's personal. Nevertheless, it's still problematic).

That's the first aspect. And then there are the other two--the man brutally murdering women, and the missing woman who was, likewise, brutally raped and abused. So, other women have been victimized and couldn't save themselves.

I suspect that the answer to your question is that the story/book/movie is or can be both. The wronged woman who gets revenge is viewed as empowering, but given that she's in many ways a stereotype, she remains exploitive. And that the mystery that she's involved in details violence and abuse against many helpless women certainly steals away from what might otherwise be empowering--a survivor of rape focusing on her strengths to solve a crime.

[boppers]

196. nit: per say? ITYM per se.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_se

Interesting perspectives, as well, I'm sorry that I got tripped up on some Latin.

[varelse]

180. Good read

but I don't see it as either empowering or exploitative. I liked the second book in the series better than this one, though.

[Vattel]

186. good movies

[madrchsod]

187. i thought the swedish version of the movie was excellent

i have my doubts about the new one

[DevonRex]

210. Empowering.

I loved Stieg Larson. I love the Lisbeth character. She was exploited by others in the books. But she triumphs. She wants to protect other women who have been abused.

There are millions of women who can relate to her.

[Marrah_G]

215. I think good movies often show the dark side of humanity. n/t

[Marrah_G]

216. One other thing- I am trying hard to not be offended

Why did you lump "gay sex" in with rape and condensation?

[dionysus]

221. i was wondering that myself... and don't have an answer. teh "gay sex" in the books wasn't offensive

at all....
edit: to RWers ok it would be...

[dionysus]

220. the books were riveting, and lisbeth is a bad-fucking-ass. swedish movies were ok (saw the first 2)

hope the american one is great as well.