Of course I have to compare both versions of the movie to the book. Surprisingly, the American version is more like the book than the Swedish version. I thought it would be the other way around. Personally, I think all the books in the Millennium series are boring. I'm finding it difficult to get through the third novel. Its not really a concept I like or relate to, and I don't really like the films either. As an art piece they were good, but the storyline was boring. So I'll just discuss the two films in this entry.
Now here's where the first difference begin. Playing Mikael Blomkvist in the Swedish version was Michael Nyqvist. Now excuse me for being rude, but either they don't have attractive people in Sweden (which based on the actors in the first and second film seems to be true) or he's considered attractive in Sweden. For being such a slut, I thought Blomkvist had to be good looking. Then you have Daniel Craig playing him in the American version. I don't see it, but apparently women here love him and find him extremely good looking. So there's the first huge difference. Who's the better Kalle Blomkvist: creepy old guy or just old guy?
The opening credits for the American version was very artsy, and it gave me the impression that they were trying too hard. Luckily, it stopped at that. In the first Swedish movie, they didn't make Blomkvist seem as much as a slut as he really is. They completely took out the affair with Erika Berger (although they included it in The Girl who Plays with Fire) and Cecilia Wagner. In the American version, they not only show their affair, but Lisbeth Salander also explains it while discussing what she found out about him. They also omit the relationship he has with Cecilia.
I am kind of curious as to why the Swedish version decided to omit the fact that Blomkvist has a daughter. They decide to have Lisbeth figure out the Biblical references and send it to him, blowing her cover. In the book and the American film, she isn't still hacking into his computer and reading his work. Making him able to suddenly drop by her apartment unannounced once he is told who she is. That was actually my favorite scene in the book. I enjoyed reading that first conversation when they met, and I was upset the Swedish version took it out.
The American version included the part when Lisbeth finds her guardian Holmer Palgren after his stroke, but they also continue to show her visiting him at the hospital when she's supposed to think he's dead until the second book. The Swedish version doesn't include Palmgreen, but has her visiting her mother in the hospital in said. American version doesn't mention her mother. Both movies leave out the funeral.
It was interesting that both movies decided to write out Anita Wagner. They still spoke about her but she was dead in both films. I thought she played a pretty important role in the novel.
I didn't like how both films went in to the second novel (The Girl who Played with Fire)even if it was for a brief time. The Swedish film showed 13 year old Lisbeth lighting a man on fire, though the audience doesn't know who either characters are. That didn't bother me as much as the American film having Lisbeth tell Blomkvist that she lit her father on fire. It goes against her character, who is very private, and it also takes away from the big secret discovered in the second book. Unless the American's don't plan on making the rest of the Millennium films, I don't understand why they had her tell him that story.
There were plenty of other minor differences between the two films and the novel, but one last big one, that I don't quite understand, is the how Harald Wagner is perceived. In the novel and the Swedish film, Harald is a nasty, old man. His attitude made him a possible suspect of the murder of Harriet. I don't why they decided to make him a completely different type of person in the American version. Harald was very nice to Blomkvist and even let him look through his photo albums, which is how he discovered the picture of Henrik. If I ever meet the screenwriters, I'd like to ask them why they went that route. There's a lot of writers of adapted screenplays for whom I have a lot of questions.
All in all, the films were okay. Not sure which ones I like better. So far, I think the second Swedish film was more similar to the second novel. The books suck though, just my opinion.
It was interesting that both movies decided to write out Anita Wagner. They still spoke about her but she was dead in both films. I thought she played a pretty important role in the novel.
I didn't like how both films went in to the second novel (The Girl who Played with Fire)even if it was for a brief time. The Swedish film showed 13 year old Lisbeth lighting a man on fire, though the audience doesn't know who either characters are. That didn't bother me as much as the American film having Lisbeth tell Blomkvist that she lit her father on fire. It goes against her character, who is very private, and it also takes away from the big secret discovered in the second book. Unless the American's don't plan on making the rest of the Millennium films, I don't understand why they had her tell him that story.
There were plenty of other minor differences between the two films and the novel, but one last big one, that I don't quite understand, is the how Harald Wagner is perceived. In the novel and the Swedish film, Harald is a nasty, old man. His attitude made him a possible suspect of the murder of Harriet. I don't why they decided to make him a completely different type of person in the American version. Harald was very nice to Blomkvist and even let him look through his photo albums, which is how he discovered the picture of Henrik. If I ever meet the screenwriters, I'd like to ask them why they went that route. There's a lot of writers of adapted screenplays for whom I have a lot of questions.
All in all, the films were okay. Not sure which ones I like better. So far, I think the second Swedish film was more similar to the second novel. The books suck though, just my opinion.
