- Description
We look at the film 'The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo' with director David Fincher and actors Daniel Craig, Rooney Mara, Christopher Plummer, Robin Wright & Stellan Skarsgard
In order to download Charlie Rose podcasts to iTunes for transfer to an iPod, you must have iTunes installed. If you do, please click the following link to download the podcast for this interview:
itpc://www.charlierose.com/view/itunes/12037
Otherwise, close this window to continue viewing.
Close
blueprince 07/09/2012 01:29 AM Report
The planets and stars were aligned for Rooney to play this part. So much so that it never occurred to me that she was also in The Social Network, where I did n't care too much for her character, yet she played it well there also.
It's stunning to see how these actors that we breathe into larger than life statutes of fantasy are still humans 'emotioning' through these rolls they play, just as we often do amidst the rolls we play or actually live out through our lives.
I'm artistically smitten with Rooney's character, as it resembles many facets of my own creative virtuosos. I'm gracious that I had the nerve to finally digest it.
fourusul 05/11/2012 05:54 PM Report
Stieg Larsson, as a journalist was concerned with brutality against women. If you read the novels, you know this. Sex trade. Women as commodity. Yes, in this day and age.
Yes, the characters are new in that we have not seen this “detective” coupling of a marginalized young woman with a man. This duo is new.
The great appeal of these novels is that we all want to root for the underdog. She had a tragic childhood and we all want her to win. Readers like her because she’s a fighter. We all like a fighter. She’s not a fainting flower.
The movie is solid good. Love David Fincher. Read the books. It is different. David got the feeling about the book, but the full experience is in the book as always.
seb12992 03/26/2012 10:18 PM Report
Not the most interesting interview I've seen Rose do, but mostly because of the people he's interviewing.
Frebdo 12/20/2011 10:04 AM Report
I am more than a little bit disappointed with David Fincher’s expressed view that this story is “all about relationships” and that the various occurrences of violence and violation are just “the setting” for exposing us to these very interesting personalities (unlike any he has ever encountered!?) and their resulting interactions.
He either spent zero time inquiring into Stieg Larsson’s life, point-of-view and heroic crusades or he is simply, self-servingly oblivious to the connection between those biographical details and the entire setting of the trilogy. Larsson had something very serious to say about power and force used habitually and systematically against women and he chose to innovate by distributing the message within a more popular, accessible medium than the small-distribution, political/intellectual magazine, Expo, that carried the majority of his writings. Since the activities that he abhorred and reported upon were, in fact, crimes…why not expose their heinous nature and ramifications in a “crime novel” setting? Great idea!! I think he succeeded in increasing readership (you think?)…if not total understanding or sympathy.
I am surprised that Charlie did not call him on this...especially after the May, 2010 exchange with the Swedish and American publication editors. Those two were very clear about the intent behind these books.
SharkswithfrikingLazers 12/20/2011 01:52 AM Report
Well Yvette Vega (so when is she getting a Wikipedia page?) did her job: five actors and the director.
However, that Executive Editor filled the time rather than edited it to make the best use of the time.
I understand:
Over 17 million copies sold (all formats) in the U.S and approaching 60 million worldwide.
http://blog.libraryjournal.com/inthebookroom/2011/06/03/stieg-larsson-stats-by-the-numbers/
But this is the second movie out in only two years.
Too many clips and it dragged.
By the way, "Men Who Hate Women" was the original title--nice.
chawlynose 12/19/2011 08:55 PM Report
This movie-story looks to be as appealing as 98% of all other Crap. 98% of Tattoos are crap; and that whole, 'Gothic' genre is not original anymore (hasn't been for over 20 years now). So that would be 100% Crap.
But obviously, Charlie Rose thinks highly of it; Why? I don't know.
finalfantasytown 12/19/2011 09:27 AM Report
When being asked where is your office or what is your job for your life, the first door, having 'family' tag on it, should be opened. I am the library keeper.
JFoley55 12/17/2011 08:06 PM Report
To REMant:
I'm not sure what you are complaining about exactly...this is simply an adaptation of a novel...Yes, a screenwriter and a director have already adapted all 3 novels in the original Swedish language, but you cannot accuse Steve Zaillian, the producers and David Fincher of rippping off that version. Also, saying that sex and violence were added?? Have you not read the novel(s)?? I do believe there is a good amount of both sex and violence, and so it wasn't "Hollywood" adding it in to catch more attention.
Before you post something like that, think about all aspects. I understand that the accents may not be spot-on, but it's hardly the first time this has happened and really not something that needs to be focused on.
finalfantasytown 12/17/2011 08:04 PM Report
Exited! I am looking forward to the girl and the Dragon tattoo.
Migukin 12/16/2011 02:06 PM Report
I'm really looking forward to this movie. I think Rooney really will do a great job on this performance. I can't wait to see how they do the sequels, if there are any.
REMant 12/16/2011 12:15 PM Report
I've seen all three of the original Swedish films and know the real point of the novels (commented on previously), which I have a feeling this film must wrench completely out of context. You can't understand it at the end of the first installment. for sure, but it is certainly not Anglo-American. I'm told this edition has expensive cinematography, and other such accoutrements, but it can't make up IMHO for that. I also don't particularly care for any of the cast here, esp Ms Mara, for whom the critics say this is a "breakthrough" performance. I really hate these anglicizations, which are almost always drivel. In this case I understand they've added a bunch of sex and violence and changed the ending. I have no idea why Americans and now the Brits, it seems, as well, can't come up with their own material and have to bowdlerize others' in the quest for a quick profit. And I don't like the arrogance involved either, when Hollywood, the Met, Broadway or the Yankees or Giants thinks it can buy a great performance from participants whose careers mean a whole lot more to them. In any case, I see the film has so far received only mediocre IMDb ratings since opening Dec 12 in Britain.