Dragon tattoos are intricate and bold designs that can be complemented with the right colors, symbols, and placement to create a personal statement of identity. Dragon tattoos are popular for their powerful symbolism and striking visual appeal, representing strength, wisdom, and protection. They often hint at overcoming adversity and embody resilience, ambition, and inner strength.
When choosing a dragon tattoo, consider the design’s personal style and story, whether it’s bold and vibrant colors or muted and intricate designs. Chinese dragon tattoos on the side of the body are a prime example of this, with the dragon outlined in black ink and some shading done by the artist. Additionally, flowers are included.
Dragon tattoos are among the most compelling and versatile designs in body art, with rich symbolism and intricate details making them a popular choice for many. This article explores what goes well with a dragon tattoo, focusing on color combinations, symbolic pairings, placement options, and cultural context.
One popular and timeless choice is the “double dragon” look, which symbolizes resilience, ambition, and inner strength. Dragon tattoos can also serve as reminders of overcoming adversity and power. Red dragon tattoos symbolize power, passion, and good fortune, and in many cultures, they are seen as protectors and bringers of prosperity.
In conclusion, dragon tattoos are a powerful and versatile design that can be complemented with various elements, such as color combinations, symbolic pairings, placement options, and cultural context.
| Article | Description | Site |
|---|---|---|
| What to Add to A Dragon Tattoo Sleeve | Explore unique ideas for what to add to your dragon tattoo sleeve, including complementary designs like cherry blossoms and other elements … | tiktok.com |
| Examples of Popular Dragon Tattoo Designs and Placements | What Goes With a Dragon Tattoo? · Another Dragon: It might seem almost too obvious, but the “double dragon” look is a popular and timeless choice … | discover.hubpages.com |
| Black Dragon Tattoo | 15+ Amazing Dragon Tattoo Designs For Men And Women! | pinterest.com |
📹 The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo: Why Fincher’s version is better
A comparison between the filmmaking techniques used in the Swedish and American versions of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo …
What Animal Goes With A Dragon Tattoo?
The dragon and tiger have long stood as powerful symbols of opposing forces, with the dragon representing yang and the tiger embodying yin. As mythical creatures, both are associated with courage and overcoming challenges. The choice of elements to complement a dragon tattoo can significantly enhance its visual impact. Traditional dragon designs are favored for their boldness, while tribal designs offer a contemporary, minimalist approach. This article delves into the meaning behind dragon tattoos across various cultures and explores complementary elements such as color combinations, symbolic pairings, and ideal placements.
Dragon tattoos are some of the most versatile and compelling in body art, symbolizing strength, wisdom, and protection. They often create striking visual statements and can be beautifully paired with elements like cherry blossoms, peonies, and other floral designs, which accentuate their elegance. For those considering a dragon tattoo, understanding its cultural significance—like the renowned Japanese Ryu tattoo—adds depth to the design.
The juxtaposition of the tiger and dragon is common; while the tiger represents yin and strength, the dragon symbolizes yang and celestial power. Within traditional Japanese culture, such designs can also include motifs like koi fish, samurai, or other legendary creatures, creating a rich tapestry of meanings.
Dragon tattoos for women symbolize grace, independence, and inner strength, reflecting a connection to intuition. Moreover, they can be strategically placed, such as on different arms in a sleeve design, with the tiger typically on the left and the dragon on the right. As a popular choice for body art, dragon tattoos inspire creativity and personal expression for many individuals looking to embark on their inking journey.
What Tattoo Compliments A Dragon?
For a distinct and personalized Japanese Dragon tattoo, consider integrating it with other elements of Japanese culture, like cherry blossoms or aspects of traditional art, fostering a harmonious blend of symbols. Dragon tattoos can be categorized into two primary types: the long, serpent-like dragons influenced by Chinese traditions—typically benevolent beings—and the large, fire-breathing dragons with immense wings. These tattoos symbolize power, wisdom, and strength across cultures, with design variations like fiery dragons or red hues representing passion.
The placement of the tattoo is crucial, as well. Combining a dragon with a warrior figure serves as a potent symbol of courage and victory, fitting well on the chest, arm, or back. Though dragon tattoos are unisex, they possess unique meanings for men and women. For men, these tattoos can reflect fearlessness, rage, or wisdom, often drawing inspiration from fictional dragons, such as those from popular series.
The appeal of the dragon motif spans across genders, ranging from stylized designs to Asian-centric pieces, sometimes even combined with knights, damsels, or treasure. Subtle designs, like the dragon's eye or claw, can also make a significant impact. Ultimately, dragon tattoos convey ideals of strength, protection, and good fortune, deeply rooted in folklore, particularly in East Asian culture where they are seen as noble, wise protectors. Dragon tattoos symbolize balance and embody qualities cherished in many traditional cultures, making them highly sought after by individuals who appreciate their aesthetic and symbolic significance.
Do You Need A Dragon Back Tattoo?
St. George, the patron saint of England, is famed as a dragon slayer in Christianity, particularly noted in The Golden Legend where he rescues a Libyan king's daughter from a dragon. Dragon tattoos, often inspired by this narrative, have become popular for back designs due to their potential for displaying majestic imagery that spans a large canvas. Suitable for both men and women, dragon back tattoos symbolize strength, wisdom, and untamed beauty, making a bold statement about individuality.
Across various cultures, particularly in Chinese and Japanese traditions, dragons are revered symbols of good fortune, prosperity, and strength. This essay highlights two vibrant red dragon tattoo designs rooted in these cultures. The Chinese dragon often spirals upward, symbolizing luck and well-being, featuring intricate shading that enhances the design's depth. Additionally, diverse dragon designs can be found, showcasing their multi-faceted meanings; for instance, fire-themed dragons are emblematic of power and courage, while water-themed ones represent wisdom and fluidity.
The abundance of dragon back tattoo designs provides significant options, encouraging individuals to explore their personal narratives through body art. Careful artistry in a full back piece allows for remarkable detailing, making the back a fitting space for dragon tattoos. Indeed, the back serves as an ideal canvas for showcasing the intricate scales and features that define dragon imagery.
In contemporary tattoo culture, back tattoos are increasingly popular, with the dragon motif standing out due to its historical significance and powerful connotations. The allure of dragon tattoos lies not only in their aesthetic beauty but also in their ability to convey profound meanings—strength, courage, luck, and love—all encapsulated within various design styles.
Moreover, it's essential to differentiate between cultural appropriation and appreciation; one can admire and choose dragon tattoos from different traditions as a sign of respect and admiration, regardless of their personal background. Japanese dragon tattoos, for instance, are believed to offer protection and happiness, further enriching the symbolic depth associated with dragon artistry.
Ultimately, dragon back tattoos resonate strongly in body art, representing the fusion of ancient mythology and modern design principles, thus allowing individuals to express their inner strength and unique style through captivating visuals.
What Goes Well With A Japanese Dragon Tattoo?
Dragons, often associated with water, typically feature prominently in tattoos, especially in Japanese culture. To complement a dragon tattoo, adding smaller elements like cherry blossoms can enhance the design without overwhelming it. This article delves into various aspects of dragon tattoos, including color combinations, symbolism, placement, and cultural significance.
Color Combinations are crucial for creating impactful dragon tattoos. Traditional Japanese dragon tattoos are rich in meaning, as they embody qualities like strength, wisdom, protection, transformation, and adaptability. These tattoos often showcase vivid colors, influenced by Japan’s preference for strong visuals, which artists utilize to convey various emotions through different hues and shadings.
The meanings behind Japanese Dragon Tattoos extend beyond aesthetics; they encapsulate deep symbolism. For instance, they represent balance (yin and yang), courage, and resilience. When contemplating what to pair with a dragon design, one must reflect personal style and narrative—whether favoring vibrant colors or intricate designs.
Dragon tattoos are celebrated for their powerful symbolism, representing qualities like strength, wisdom, and intellectual prowess. As majestic beings, dragons evoke strength and transformative power, making them a popular choice for body art.
There are many ideas for enhancing a dragon sleeve tattoo, such as incorporating floral elements like peonies or cherry blossoms. Choosing complementary designs, such as mythical creatures (e. g., Phoenix, Kirin, and koi carp) or other auspicious symbols, can add significant depth to the artwork. The color of the dragon itself bears meaning: black might symbolize wisdom, while green connects to nature, and gold often signifies wealth and prosperity.
Additionally, the combination of a dragon with a tiger is a timeless choice; where the tiger embodies courage and bravery, the dragon symbolizes majesty and strength. This exploration of dragon tattoos inspires creativity and encourages individuals to express their unique stories through thoughtful design choices.
What Kind Of Tattoo Should You Get For A Dragon?
Dragon forearm tattoos are an excellent choice for those seeking a simpler design. If you're interested in a Japanese dragon adorned with cherry blossoms or inked in red, a larger dragon leg tattoo might be the way to go. For smaller or tribal designs, a dragon neck tattoo could suit your preferences. Regardless of whether you're a tattoo novice or a seasoned collector, a dragon tattoo can serve as a striking and meaningful addition to your body art.
Dragon tattoos symbolize a range of meanings across cultures, from fearlessness to rage, passion, and wisdom. They can also represent beloved fictional dragons, lending a personal touch to your choice. Artistic styles, color palettes, and sizes vary widely, offering plenty of options to match your aesthetic. For those desiring a dragon tattoo that can be concealed during work, smaller designs can be easily placed anywhere on the body.
You'll find a wealth of inspiration in the diverse realm of dragon tattoo ideas, from elaborate arm sleeves to intricate back pieces. Popular designs are influenced by the rich history and symbolism of dragons found in different cultures over the centuries, making it easy to discover your perfect piece of mythical ink.
Minimalist dragon tattoos can also present a simple yet elegant choice, utilizing clean lines and subtle imagery for a powerful effect. You might consider tattooing specific elements of a dragon, such as its eye or claw, for a more understated homage to the creature.
The origins of dragon tattoos trace back to ancient China and Japan, where dragons symbolize strength, force, and boundless power. With a significant presence in tattoo culture, exploring the fascinating world of dragon designs can inspire your next body art decision, reflecting your adventurous spirit and personal beliefs.
What Matches With A Dragon?
According to Chinese zodiac compatibility, individuals born in the Year of the Dragon tend to form harmonious relationships with those of the Rooster, Rat, and Monkey signs, suggesting a likely happy marriage. Conversely, they are advised to avoid partners from the Ox, Sheep, or Dog signs. Dragons seek partners who can match their vibrant energy and share their enthusiasm for life. The Rooster, Rat, and Monkey are viewed as the most compatible, providing balance and harmony to the Dragon's dynamic nature.
For Dragons born in specific months, compatibility varies. For instance, a February-born Dragon boy would best match with a Rooster. Among the compatible signs, the relationship between Dragon and Rat is particularly strong, as they can foster great love, support each other's successes, and navigate challenges seamlessly. Respect underpins the Dragon's relationship with the Ox, although the latter is not recommended for serious partnerships.
The Dragon is part of a compatibility triangle along with the Monkey and Rat, with the Rooster acting as a secret ally. Understanding between the Dragon and Rat typically flourishes, with both signs possessing a generous spirit and the capability to overlook each other.
However, the Dragon is seen as somewhat select in intimate relationships, valuing aesthetics and glamour, which may lead to complicated romantic entanglements. They are known for their gracious and benevolent nature. When considering zodiac compatibility: the best matches for the Dragon are Rooster, Rat, and Monkey, while Ox, Dog, and Sheep are least compatible.
Ultimately, the ideal partner for a Dragon is someone who can reflect their zeal for life and share common interests, fostering a fruitful and creative relationship. The unique traits of each compatible zodiac sign enhance the Dragon's vibrant personality, resulting in a thriving union marked by excitement and mutual growth.
Is Dragon Tattoo Good Or Bad?
The dragon tattoo is a symbol rich in meanings, including good luck, protection, wisdom, peace, strength, and power. Traditionally, Chinese dragon tattoos are believed to enhance these attributes in life. However, they can embody both positive and negative aspects, symbolizing power alongside fear, illustrating the duality of strong emotions. In various cultures, dragons are potent symbols representing wisdom and fortune, while also intertwining with folklore across the globe.
Dragon tattoos rank among the most popular designs in the tattoo community due to their intricate beauty and deep symbolism. Many find them to be captivating, yet there are differing opinions regarding their meanings. Beyond aesthetic appeal, dragon tattoos can serve as talismans for protection and resilience, encouraging individuals to confront adversity—marking a powerful assertion of strength and courage. Wealth and prosperity are particularly associated with golden dragon tattoos, as gold typically signifies value and abundance across cultures.
Cultural perceptions of dragons vary significantly; while dragons in Eastern cultures are viewed positively—symbolizing luck and protection—in Western depictions, they are often portrayed as evil and treacherous beasts. This contrast underscores the complexity of dragon symbolism. For instance, the black dragon tattoo is emblematic of the darker aspects of existence, representing the interplay of good and evil, akin to the yin-yang concept.
In conclusion, dragon tattoos encapsulate a multidimensional symbolism, embodying attributes of strength, wisdom, courage, and protection. The diverse meanings, shaped by cultural nuances and interpretations, make the dragon a compelling choice for a tattoo. Aspiring tattoo wearers should reflect on their significance to determine if a dragon tattoo resonates with them personally, considering both its protective qualities and deeper symbolism woven throughout history.
What Flower Goes With A Dragon Tattoo?
Dragons coupled with flowers, particularly chrysanthemums, create striking tattoo designs that blend beauty and profound symbolism. Dragon Flower Tattoos symbolize themes like seeking love guidance and protection in relationships. Artists often create variations with different florals, such as lotus flowers and roses, each carrying its unique meanings. For those intrigued by oriental themes, exploring cherry blossom dragon tattoos can yield stunning results.
Combining dragons and flowers results in a captivating union of strength and grace, allowing for a personalized approach to body art. Floral accents soften the fierce nature of dragons while adding elegance to designs. For instance, incorporating a lotus flower introduces spiritual depth, symbolizing purity and enlightenment.
Clouds, representing air, can also enhance the composition, emphasizing the mystical aspect of these tattoos. The significance of the lotus flower—representing purity, enlightenment, and rebirth—coupled with the dragon's symbolism of wisdom and good fortune, signifies a journey toward spiritual awakening and overcoming challenges.
Individuals looking to create dragon-themed tattoos, such as a dragon sleeve, may consider adding flowers like peonies, ensuring that their design adheres to aesthetic guidelines without breaking common themes. The fusion of a dragon and peony in an Irezumi tattoo tells a unique narrative beyond mere appearance.
The harmony of different elements in dragon and flower tattoos evokes a broad range of meanings and artistic expressions. Whether opting for fine line designs or vibrant interpretations, these tattoos resonate with themes of luck, strength, and beauty. Discovering inspiration for such tattoos from platforms like Pinterest can spark creativity and offer endless possibilities. Ultimately, dragon tattoos paired with floral designs create a mesmerizing blend of power and elegance worth exploring.
What Animal Is Compatible With Dragon?
In Chinese Astrology, the Dragon, as the fifth sign of the zodiac, enjoys strong compatibility with the Rooster, Rat, and Monkey. These signs belong to the first compatibility triangle, fostering harmonious relationships. Conversely, Dragons should steer clear of the Ox, Sheep, and Dog, as these pairings are less favorable.
The relationship dynamics between the Dragon and the Rat, both part of the love compatibility triangle alongside the Monkey, indicate the potential for deep love due to their mutual understanding and ability to forgive and support each other through mistakes. The Dragon, known for its strength and independence, attracts individuals born under the signs of Tiger, Rooster, Horse, Goat, Rabbit, and Pig, who appreciate its charismatic and assertive nature.
When examining specific compatibilities, the Dragon and Rat pair is particularly promising, as the Rat's intelligence complements the Dragon's leadership qualities. Their union tends to be profound, marked by a strong emotional connection. The Dragon and Pig also make an engaging couple, often seen as a joyful and romantic match.
On the other hand, the relationships with the Dog or Rabbit are generally not recommended, as these combinations can lead to discord. The Dragon tends to dominate in relationships, but they appreciate the Rat's cunning and resourcefulness.
Dragons exhibit strong willpower but quickly temper their anger, suggesting they can navigate conflicts efficiently, especially with those they are compatible with.
In conclusion, the Dragon thrives alongside fellow "go-getter" signs like the Rat, Monkey, and Rooster, as they share similar ambitious and innovative traits. However, they should focus on avoiding the less compatible signs of Dog and Rabbit, which may create friction in their relationships. Overall, through mutual respect and shared interests, Dragons can cultivate fulfilling connections with their most suitable zodiac counterparts.
Should You Get A Dragon Shoulder Tattoo?
A dragon shoulder tattoo serves as an excellent choice for those looking to fill unique body shapes, given its ability to adapt to the shoulder's natural curves. This area can present design challenges, but dragons offer an elegant solution, providing a stunning visual display. For men, the top 40 dragon shoulder tattoo designs reveal the allure and strength of these mythical creatures, showcasing diverse styles that range from bold and impactful to intricate and detailed.
Dragon tattoos are rich in symbolism, often representing resilience, endurance, and power. Many individuals choose dragon designs to create full sleeves, allowing for a continuous flow of artistry from wrist to shoulder. These tattoos can also extend from the shoulder onto the chest or arm, making them striking and dynamic.
Choosing the right placement is crucial, especially if the design will cover significant portions of the body. The serpentine nature of dragons promotes a sense of organic movement, and a thoughtfully crafted design can enhance the body's contours. Passionate connections to dragon motifs can be deepened through meditation or studying dragon mythology, infusing personal significance into the tattoo.
While designs can vary, medium and large dragon tattoos are particularly well-suited for the shoulder and upper arm, exuding classiness or a sense of power depending on the design. The cultural origins of dragon tattoos stem from ancient China and Japan, where they symbolize strength and unlimited power. Celtic dragon tattoos also add a unique flair. Essentially, a dragon tattoo on the shoulder not only serves as a beautiful piece of art but also signifies the strength required to take on life’s challenges. Seek out inspiration and find a design that resonates with you.
📹 The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo – Movie Review
Chris Stuckmann reviews The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, starring Daniel Craig, Rooney Mara, Christopher Plummer, Stellan …
I was taken by the original film when it was available and made sure to watch the others as soon as they were available. I’ve never traveled outside the US, so, I was intrigued by the different culture, the movie’s characters, but also the plot itself. I thought they were really good films and didn’t mind at all the subtitles. I watched the American version and liked it, but I found myself wanting to watch the original adaptation.
I’ve loved Fincher’s version for many years and just recently decided to watch the original Swedish version. I find it astounding people prefer that one over Fincher’s. It is a good movie no question but imo Fincher’s is the perfect adaptation of the material, even the things he tweaked I found to be more engaging for a film version. I love the leads in other roles I’ve seen them in but I found Mara and Craig more engaging. They felt like real people, Craig got to be messy (takes up smoking again, sleeps around) and Mara brought more of a stunted child who is actually brilliantly dangerous vibe to the role. Their chemistry is palpable in a way I never felt with the original and when their relationship progresses it feels more real than in the original where it comes almost out of left field. Fincher also excels in making things that are typically boring like snooping through old documents and pictures engaging for the viewer as opposed to the original where it got a little corny in spots. Tone is also extremely important and Fincher with help from Trent Reznor & Atticus Ross’s soundtrack pull you in to the dark and cold world of the story in a way I didn’t feel in the original. I think the main things the original has over Fincher’s is being in the original Swedish language and the fact that they got to do all three books with the same cast, Fincher never got the green light for the other two.
Good analysis. I am from Sweden and for me the Swedish one is more cozy and straigth forward. I can understand that some foreign people liking it more, just because it is exotic to see something made from here. Finchers movie is well paced and more uncomfortable to watch. Therefore, more valued and better.
I think any film aficionado worth his grain of salt will agree that Fincher’s product is the superior adaptation. By adaptation I mean just that, it encapsulates the mood and retells the story of the novel, without being a one-for-one retranscription, which the Swedish version accurately does. I do like it, but honestly the people in the comments coming to it’s defense are either Scandinavian (understable) or have rose-tinted glasses. The pacing is so much better in David Fincher’s adaptation.
I think you’re right in terms of phrasing it ‘tension and intrigue” but I wouldn’t call it more complex. The moments that pass between characters (I feel) is actually a lot more limited. The film and script do all the telling, telling us what people think, showing her walk with a very controlled world perspective and then very little happening between them in the scene when they meet. By contrast the Swedish one tells us much less and has a more banal visual treatment of the world as we’re arriving. So when she arrives that meeting what we need to know about her relationship to the world is created between her and Frode, his confusion at this kind of person, her modernity contrasting with his older understanding of the world and weirdly his forming respect for her. All that exists between the two characters where in Finchers version it’s told to us, literally, by her boss, making for a more passive, guided experience. It creates intrigue but it makes it a simpler moment for the viewer to understand. my opinion
You nailed it. I watched the Swedish version first, and it felt very cold, like I was just being fed information. I didn’t remember any scenes or performances afterwards. With the Fincher version, I FELT what the story was about and what the characters were going through, and so many scenes and performances are etched in my mind. Lesson: Feeling first, information second.
“The swedish version (…) is just okay” : seriously what ?! Come on it’s not fair to Oplev’s work ! It deserves so much more than that. Fincher based his movie on it, with more than 6x the original movie budget, of course its cleaner… But the original really makes you feel stuff man, and Noomi Rapace… my god she was way better than Rooney for this role, she was living it.
Yeah this is just nit picking. Just the same as if I were to point out that in Fincher’s version Lisbeth has spiky hair. Yet was wearing a helmet. What did she do,fix her hair in the elevator on the way up? That’s not very punk. So you like Finchers version better,obviously. Why not just break down the craft of that film.
So basically, it is about stretching of moment? Anyway i am prefer Swedish version. US version seems to be too americanized, which migh be better in comparisons, but for me its less believable. btw.: ‘framed flower’ stretch was not stretch at all. In Swedish version it was revealed in first minute of movie, so there was no reason for stretching in minute 19. Just detail. 🙂
I appreciate the comparisons and contrasts between the two stylings of the adaptation. Thank you for taking the time to do this. I liked both versions but the Swedish one felt more authentic. Perhaps because it is in native tongue or the mannerisms of the characters are more on par with Scandanavians. As the franchise moves forward I sincerely hope the essence of storyline and characterizations remain intact.
I recognized the talent in the Swedish one, I live in europe and was the first one I saw, but there is something in the remake that made it brilliant. The swedish is a good movie, of course it is, but then again, Fincher has something out of this world, a magic touch that just a few people has and that doesn’t means that Niel Arden Oplev isn’t a great director too. I loved the swedish when comes out, but when Fincher remaked it made me love the story even more. Oplev gave us the story for the first time and obviously is the same plot, but I think a lot of people thinks that, because it’s the same plot, it’s not original, so the movie is not good at all. Love the first one, but Zaillian and Fincher, for me, made a better job. Love your article, sir, please do more!!!!
I agree with you completely. I’ve watched the entire trilogy of the Swedish films and also read the books. I felt that the Fincher version, while adopting the Swedish film ending, did an incredible job of portraying the true tone and emotion of the book. I prefer the ending in the book, but I prefer the American version. They had the budget to make a better film and they did just that. I just wish that David Fincher could have completed the entire trilogy. Now we are stuck with a trilogy that is okay rather than one that could have been absolutely outstanding.
I did like the style of the Fincher’s film, I immediately rewatched the original for comparison and appreciated the original more. Fincher’s is retelling a Swedish to American audiences so it’s going to be “salted” that way. To see some of those scenes side-by-side was cool as a breakdown. I totally enjoyed your article 👍👍👍
Hollywood version assumes audience needs to have everything explained to them, which is a kind of condescension and it’s too polished when you compare it to the source material. While I appreciate Fincher’s mood-setting, the Swedish version is better, more understated like the book, also Noomi is superior playing the lead.
I kept seeing people saying how the Swedish version was so much better. So I watched both, and was SOOOO much more impressed by the Fincher version! The Swedish trilogy was gorgeous to look at, but too understated and oddly “pleasant” and often bland. The Fincher version was also gorgeous to look at, but INTENSE in every way! Plus, this is the ONLY film I have ever actually LIKED perusal Daniel Craig in. His Bloomqvist was much more emotive and sympathetic. Yes, the difference in budget must be taken into account, but i’ve a feeling even with the same budget the Swede version would have been much the same.
I’m a 66 y.o. American who doesn’t shy away from foreign films and I saw the Swedish version in the theater when it came to Los Angeles. I saw the Fincher version when it came out. My gut feeling was that the Swedish was a little better but both excellent films. You could say that the element of surprise was removed for Fincher’s film and that may be why I preferred the original. For me, who loves Fincher films, I think all of your comments are meaningless in the grand picture of appreciating the Movie. I’d recommend the original unless one just doesn’t like reading subtitles. I also saw the other 2 Swedish films of the trilogy. Dragon Tattoo was the best if my memory doesn’t fail me. I’d say the same for “Let the Right One In” as well.
I think your analysis presents a moot point. The people and characters are painted much more lively and real in the swedish version. Take the scenes with Lisbeth in her job. Everybody hates her, she hates the job. Why is she there? In the original she is painted as an expert. She is prized for her expertise, her knowledge is special which makes her valuable. It makes sense. She loves her job – not the people. And the people don’t care, because she is good at what she does. This is of course just an example. But it is represented all the way through the movie. You are comparing scenes – scenes are different because of experience and budget. But you cast that aside at the beginning. So why are we comparing? If that does not matter, and the content and quality writing does not matter. There is no substance. This is just a way to show how great Fincher is. At least in my opinion.
the exposition of the family information in the Fincher film isnt massively disguised by emotion. In fact, its not disguised by conflict as the commentator suggests, as Craig and Plummer are actually having a jolly conversation. Its pretty plain exposition – but then I think in both films its needed because its important to understand the plot
Coming to this analysis a little late… I saw both and was surprised to see so many people saying they prefer the original. I mean, it’s always hip to say “the original was so much better”, especially if it’s an american discussing a foreign film that got ‘americanized’. But to me the original just felt less professional and less exciting. Why do people feel it’s wrong to “hollywood” films by making everything stylized and dramatic? That’s the point. Nobody wants to hear a story if it’s recited like a trip to the grocery store. But a trip to the grocery store can sound exciting if dramatized by a great storyteller. I did like Rapace as Lisbet… but she is borderline too pretty. Even with wild hair and makeup and piercings, she looks like a movie star. Great sweep of hair framing her face, pretty dark eyeshadow, nice jawline… Mara is not hideous or anything, but with her awful short-bangs bowl cut, almost-missing eyebrows, more extreme piercings, she looks almost alien. More like a tough kid. More like a real-world punk, someone who makes other people uncomfortable. I guess this is offset by Daniel Craig who is maybe unrealistically handsome for some random magazine editor, whereas Nykvist is very plausible in that role. But as has already been pointed out, his acting is a little flat… always sleepy-eyed disengaged. Anyway cheers for the article, these comparisons are interesting. Would like to see more.
Bro, I don’t subscribe to anyone .. I come from a family of writers .. you just blew my doors off .. and that never happens .. my mom is a pretty big writer .. I was, once upon a time too.. .. bro, we all love YouTube … this is the first time I dropped a comment in 15 years .. bravo bro, hope we get to talk one day
I hate how people think less of the Swedish version. It was better then the remake. It seemed pointless to make a film where the actors are people of a different country but don’t speak the language. Just have them speak English why? Because American audiences are so lazy they don’t wanna read subtitles. They made they characters worse in the American version. PS it wasn’t an American version! I spied two Americans in it Rooney and Wright, the rest were Europeans and one Canadian.
Loved the article, the people below make some very valid points but i think that it doesn’t really matter if you’re right or wrong or if your’e biased, you point at some very interesting criteria for perusal a movie and shine a light on several directorial and screenwrigting tecniques that really shape the story and take viewers somewhere. So you’re biased, well good, movies are art and as such call upon dephts of our being, to talk about art pretending to be objective is just a lie, people who criticize below are not wrong I just think they’re missing the point which is not weather you’re right or wrong but weather the article is insightfull and/or provoking and for me it was both. I’d really like to watch some more articles from you, hope you make some more, cheers!
I thought both versions were wonderful in their different ways. The Swedish version was a bit dryer, which gave it neutrality – more authentic from what an unknowing viewer/witness going along would experience. The American version was a more “wet” production, showing more expression, leading the viewer, which enriches and thus provides more depth and builds more suspense, etc., but as another commented, leaves less dynamics and shock when surprises occur than the Swedish version. (I use the analogy of an electric guitar player, with dry tone (direct to the amp) or wet (through foot pedals that add sound textures) – either and both have their place and can be used tastefully or overdone. In these two films, both styles are done very tastefully. Both had top shelf actors. Both were engrossing to the point where I didn’t think for an instant about the other version while perusal. It’s a really great story, that affords versatility in how it can be told.
I really enjoyed the comparison of the two films. perusal the original version dubbed in English rather than Swedish with English subtitles makes a big difference. The American version is a lot better and I believe that has to do with David Craig mostly and his reaction shots. Like said in this article, the original version the reaction shots of the main character, he appears to be uninterested or sleepy. Well done!
I love David Finchers movies but for some reason, i never got into The Girl with the Dragon Tatoo that much. I found it kinda meh. Usially I Love his movies. Half of his filmography is anong my all time favorites. Yet this particular one I keep forgetting even exists. I havent yet seen the swedish version so cant comment on it, but I soon will.
The choice of music in regards to the scene from Fincher’s movie was actually an accident. Fincher had decided that Martin should be playing music while the scene was happening, but he couldn’t decide on what type of song to go for. Daniel Craig was scrolling through the songs he had on his iPhone and called out the first song he came across, that being Orinoco Flow by Enya, it was initially met with laughter by the people on set, including Fincher.
Damn, I love the details of Fincher’s character building and this film might be his magnus opus in that regard. My favorite bit: In the torture cellar scene when Martin (Stellan Skarsgård) is itching his wrist subetly and gains I slight impression of disgust in his face as soon as he talks about his father, tells so much about: the father, Martin’s relation to him and the advanced method and craziness of Martin compared to his ‘mentor’. Just brilliant, in any way, shape, or form: Cutting, directing, acting
Reading the comment section… a lot of people who don’t make movies. If you make movies, you’d understand that they are both extremely well crafted but done by a different crew, with a different perspective. I’ve seen both and have to say that I don’t find one better than the other, they are just different and they are both great.
I’ve seen both– I’ve just finished the Trilogy and yes, Fincher’s film is aesthtically beautiful, but the Swedish film, is the GOAT. I love Fincher’s version and watch it often, but the Swedish Trilogy just sucks you completely into these characters. Completely. Noomi Rapace IS Lisbeth Salander. Completely. I wish we could’ve been given the trilogy from Fincher to really make a proper assessment. Its a travesty we didnt get a second or third film, yet we were given what? Like 7 transformer films?! Lol. Crazy.
I think one thing to take note of is also that the lead is played by a Swede in the Swedish version and an Englishman in the US version. The mood should be different, seeing as their perspectives would differ slightly. But yes, the fincher/craig combo is hard to beat. edit: it seems craig is supposed to be swedish, but it doesn’t feel that way, my bad.
I think the Fincher film is vastly underrated and one of the biggest crimes in cinema history is that we never got the sequel. That being said I watched the Swedish films after the Fincher films are I thought they were amazingly transportive in a similar way to the film. The Fincher film is amazingly atmospheric and moody, while the Swedish films felt authentically European in a way that many BBC shows often feel; its a really euphoric and immersive experience IMO. The books are great as well, being noir but in a weirdly modern way. Personally i really love the whodunnit of the first novel the best. The sequel we did get however, The Girl in the Spider’s Web, had some moments but was mostly was underwhelming; but I guess its nice to have more time with the characters.
Great article. There doesn’t always need to be a question with a drawn out reveal of the answer. Sometimes, seeing the answer first allows the audience to ask the question themselves. The shot in the Swedish version pulling back to show more and more of the flowers on the wall is so much more compelling than wondering what Daniel Craig is staring at in the American version. I’ve read all the books and the Swedish casting is what comes to mind when I think of the characters. Love the American cast (minus Rooney Mara) and director too, but it just seemed like a waste of time and money when the better films had already been made.
I love the 3 swedish movies. The American version crams more than the first book into the one movie and misses on the portrayal of Lisbeth. It’s ok but I won’t rewatch it while I have watched the Swedish movies many times including the extended versions. I can agree Fincher’s techniques are definitely better but that’s like judging a book better because it has better prose while ignoring the story. And this is coming from a 65 year old American from Kansas.
I saw both versions and I alway thought that the Fincher version was better aesthetically speaking. But since it was a remake, it felt almost slanderous to say so. So I’m really glad I’m not alone in this case. I wish the cast and crew behind the remake would continue with the original trilogy sequels.
There r a wide variety of reasons I have a preference 4the American version, despite I love both! 1 of the main reason is the miraculous, detailed, & articulate work Trent Reznor & Atticus Ross infused 2gether, as if the movie was made 4it & vice versa, where the music was made 4the movie, like 1hand washing the other!! ♥ That’s just 1 if several reasons, IMO.
I have seen both films and read the book, and while I have to say that I do think that the Swedish version feels more “authentic” and sticks closer to the book, I prefer the American version in the cinema. I remember perusal the American version for the first time and I thought that the acting could not have been better or the tension more palpable. I appreciated how much Fincher didn’t hold back. The book has so many harsh topics; rape, serial killers, blackmail, and the film handled it well. The Swedish version seemed almost sanitized. I am sad that we didn’t get to see more of Fincher in sequels, because the Swedish sequels seemed to get almost repetitive at times with music and cinematography. Like, straight to TV rather than cinema. Either way good for both, but preferred Fincher
that Enya track bit was my favorite moment in fincher’s version. he is an incredible craftsman for sure. very engaging. i do like the original version as well – it’s not possible to compare these and rank them without considering the disparity in their budgets though, to produce a stylized result as the American version, every moment must have been very expensive
I watched the Swedish version of the Trilogy three rimes and I love it more each time. The American version is O.K. but Craig is so well known as 007 that it gets in the way. The male lead in the Swedish version is just a guy. He may be honest and decent but he doesn’t come across as a heroic figure. Thank God for the Girl with the tattoo. She is small but smart and tough as nails! She saves the male lead and does it in a totally believable way…with a golf club! And her battle with the giant in the third movie is spectacular! Just say’n.
I watch both versions of the original well over a dozen times the extended series version and the movie I’ve seen the American one 3 times. the filming style is far better on the American one . the Swedish one has more authentic atmosphere and the acting is so much better noomi Rapace was so much better than rommi mara .
Apart from the star actors I think the screenplay and dialogue were much better than the Swedish version, the exchange of dialogue between characters in fincher film have a subtle dramatisation but yet it was convincing done by the actors. The Swedish version was more realistic what people would do normally which is a bit “boring” but that’s the realistic way. Also the seating of mood, cinematography especially colour palette used in the Fincher movie, sets a tone for the interest. Also when did you ever get to see James Bond play an investigative journalist compared to a lethal spy? That was also one of the success of the film. The female lead for the film was also interesting and intriguing to watch.
I’m late to this discussion, obviously. Comparing the two versions is easy for me. Fincher’s version is art and it is beautifully done. The Swedish version is more raw. The differences in how Lisbeth is presented is staggering and makes me wonder about the accuracy of the English translation. Lisbeth in the Swedish version is far more aggressive. When she walks down the street, she walks in the center and practically dares anyone to block her path. In the American version, Lisbeth hugs the wall as she walks, avoiding eye contact and trying to not be noticed. She resorts to violence only when she must. Mara’s portrayal, under the guidance of Fincher, is the same Lisbeth as in the English version of the book. Yes, I know we like our Lisbeth to be a kick ass and a bad ass, but she isn’t. More than anything, she just wants to be left alone. That’s why I wonder about the translation. But for me, having only read the books in English, the American version is superior.
Lizbeth’s look in Oplevs version is very in your face; loud & flamboyant with her stereotypical goth style, spiked choker & platform boots etc. Noomi Rapace also looks healthy, she also seems approachable, at least in my eyes. while in finchers version Rooney Mara’s sense of style, while still alternative is a lot more subdued with a dash of deathrock and rivet head sensibility, she has more of a “fuck off, I sting if you get too close” type of aura. Lizbeth as described in the book fits Rooney Mara very well; skinny, looks a bit fragile while being a very attractive women with an abrasive aloof personality, like in the book she looks exactly as described here, “She looked as though she had just emerged from a week long orgy with a gang of hard rockers.” Both are good flicks, but Fincher’s directing really did leave a mark on me, which made this film my favorite within his filmography.
The flower is shown in the first scene of fincher’s, and we also get the dumbfounding piece of information that the current flower came from the first post mark as the previous one….which is insane to think about, given the circumstances. Wouldn’t this uber-wealthy guy be staking out previous mailing locations? Bribing postal workers to intercept and track representative packages around the date in question and geneally covering this point MUCH more closely? Reminds me of Dark Knight when the Joker’s henchman imagines you can know the number of shots in a sawn-off shotgun’s tube, give that there are at least three different length variants and they don’t exactly get uch of a look t the shotgun he’s using. Takes you somewhat out of it right away.
I saw the Swedish version first and so I will always love it. Yes Fincher’s version is more artsistic, more cinematic with better sound design but as another commentor said it doesn’t feel as authentic or real as the Swedish version. I enjoy Fincher’s version but there’s few area’s that Fincher’s version is not as good. In the Swedish version, Noomi Rapace is better as Lizbeth, the rape scene is more vile (when Lizbeth gets her revenge the actor sells the pain more then in Fincher’s version) plus we get the complete story with the other two novels having been filmed.
I liked both very much, although I think the male lead was a bit stronger in the US film and the female a bit stronger in the Swedish. I somewhat preferred the resolution of the mystery in the Swedish film, but preferred the final scenes in the American. Yeah, the cinematography was superior in the American film. But I enjoyed both motion pictures a great deal.
You focus on how much was spent polishing the movie so you miss the main point. The Swedish film has incredible acting from everyone involved. The old men in the film are amazing, so much so you might find yourself crying at the end of the movie. Noomi Rapace is a Wonder Woman in the different sides of a woman she portrays. This film is the reason Ridley Scott cast Noomi Rapace in Prometheus, which has to be the best Sci Fi movie in a decade. You can hear this from Ridley himself if you purchase the DVD/BluRay with the extra content. Lastly, the accents are a refreshing change of pace. Listening to the English dubbed version is like chalk on a blackboard. This movie was so good it was the first movie where I enjoyed reading the subtitles. This movie is actually the first of a trilogy that was filmed back to back to back. The Girl Who Played with Fire is the second file in the series, and you might again find yourself crying at the end of the movie. The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets Nest if the last film of the trilogy. It is needed to bring closure to the series, and it cements (in my mind) the fact that Noomi is a truly amazing actress. P.S: I am biased because by the end of the series I fell in love with the actress (Noomi). You can also find her in Prometheus, What Happened to Monday, Sherlock Holmes, Bright (as the Inferni, in one of Netflix’s most streamed movies ever), and Unlocked.
I absolutely love both films, considering the budget, they both succeeded in presenting an enjoyable, exciting and creative film adaptation of the source material. Fincher, (as mentioned in the article) has an inate talent of stretching the moment, and forcing the viewer to wait for a question they come up with on their own. Which makes for phenominal tension, and generally inovative cinematography. However one thing i will admit annoyed me with his adaptation, In Oplev’s version (the swedish one) the film stays loyal to the source material and correctly presents all of the narrative points, and plot pieces that were part of what made the books so elaborate and unique. I get that not everyone cares if the movie correctly recreates the book word for word (especially those who hadn’t read the books) but for those who had great admiration for Larsson’s work, it came as a bit upsetting to see some of these plots being sidelined for simplicity ‘for an american audience’. Some of the more major examples would be when Anita’s character was revealed to be Harriet all along, completely retconning the book’s last few chapters involving wire tapping, multiple trips accross countries and Blomkvist and Salander working together to eventually find Harriet in Australia (which ties into the flower we’re first introduced to in the book, a rare and native species found only in Australia). Otherwise, both films were an enjoyable experience, but depending on whether you value loyalty to the founding material or general filmaking, Fincher’s version may or may not be greater than Oplev’s.
Watched the Swedish version first, enjoyed it but wasn’t blown away by any means based off the filmmaking, of course the story is fantastic. The fincher version, which I watched before my current obsession with Fincher, is just far superior in many ways. Partly that’s due to budget sure, but it’s also how the scenes are directed and the actual staging. It sucked me in so much more. The swedish one, by comparison feels more like a great gripping TV show, which isn’t a knock on it, it’s just not as great as Fincher’s. The Lisbeth opening scene alone teaches you more about her character too in the Fincher film.
“The swedish version is not bad, not great, Just okay” it’s directly from the book!! You know this is why there is the phrase about films ‘the book was better’ because the filmmakers want to make it theirs. They try to make it there art piece with someone else his/her artpiece. For book adoptation you must love the book that is written and wel recieved. Stieg Larssons The Millennium thrilogy are high books and extremly well recieved. The Swedish was the best, the American was their fun take on it.
The Swedish version is more realistic and the characterization is closer to the books than the American version. I appreciated it much more than the American version which was another Hollywood version of something foreign. Noomi Rapace’s depiction of Lisbeth was spot on! She did not give two fucks! I thought the Swedish version did a great job of finding actors that fit the parts based on the book. I only watched the first American film, because I thought it was that bad. I watched the whole Swedish version and loved them!!
All points are totally acceptable, but as a fan of the books I personally like the Swedish version better. The books had a sense/theme of real life to them (eg. describing the characters eating breakfast and contemplating) making the reader remember that horrors of the book are things which occur in real life (rape, sex trafficking, etc). I appreciated the Swedish version better because it felt like I was perusal real life okay out, the characters would speak to each other not in a dramatic, cinematic way, but on the same way people talk in real life. The American movie is so artistic it makes me forget that the occurrences happening in it really occur, and if they did happen everything comes out peachy in the end. So I accept the creator of this article’s opinion in a cinematic viewpoint, that the American film is a better movie, but I feel that the Swedish film hit the theme of the books better.
I’m a big Fincher fan, he’s a master craftsman. However I think you’re being a bit unfair calling the original Swedish movie ‘average’. I saw it at the flicks, when it came out, and it was very memorable. It had fantastic performance by Noomi Rapace and broke quite a few conventions of main stream cinema of the time. I also agree with some of the comments: the Oplev version has more warmth to the characters and a slightly more realistic feel. The Fincher version is very stylised, which I love, but sometimes his films can be a bit cold. I agree about Fincher’s reaction shots being better, although I didn’t really see a problem with Swedish flower reveal scene. It just setup a question. I liked both versions, although I have to say I enjoyed the first more because I had no idea where the story was going, whereas Fincher’s version is basically the same story (with some changes) done with a much bigger budget. However if I’d seen Fincher’s version first I might feel differently. I do wish Fincher had carried on with the rest of the trilogy though, as the second two Swedish films (by different directors) aren’t as good, with lots of room for improvement.
Wrong Swedish is better, it’s not trying to be Norse it is Norse. You or perhaps read the books first, Finch just tells the storey in basic way so you it might be understood and allows a younger audience. This is not a fairy tale it’s a complex crime thriller where the storey unfolds giving slow reveals to the unknown back storey. So it’s Swedish emotion cold and indifferent but with underlying emotion, or it’s clearer more cinematic with emotion on the surface. I prefer the first version, but I did read the books first before perusal the both films and the first film in both in Swedish with subtitles and then dubbed into English . The second film skips parts of the subtext to make it easier viewing.
I enjoyed the talk, comparison, but I differ in the take of some of the things this guys says. To me the biggest thing that he did not talk about was, the Swedish films were much closer to the actual Stieg Larson tales, that Fincher. I liked how he discussed stretching the moment, I think that’s a useful technique, and his ask as question, then answer it as a way of creating tension. That said, Fincher left things out of the story, that were important to the tale. That’s a failure to my mind. I loved Craig as Bloomkvist, but I was surprised on how much I liked the other guy. Bloomkvist isn’t supposed to be a superhero, and this guy embodies a guy who is middle aged but capable. His some what non committal looks at times I think adds to the idea, he’s thinking but unsure. In a way, it’s more real. That said, I still love what Craig did, and what Fincher brought to the film with these ideas of how to expose what he was trying to get at. In the end, I enjoyed what was said here, and even think I learned somethings, or at least it made me think about approach, but in the end, I liked the Swedish film better, because it was the story, not Fincher’s story.
My main objection to the Fincher version is the end when Lisbeth sentimentalizes her relationship with Mikael when she brings a gift to him. Outside the apartment she pauses when she hears a conversation out Mikael’s apartment between him and a woman. Lisbeth assumes that the relationship is romantic (I don’t remember the context since it has been a long time since I have seen the film) and trashes the gift without a second’s hesitation.
Unfortunately, we’re never going to see Fincher sequels to TGWTDT, nor will there be any more books written by Stieg Larsen about the complex relationship between Mikhail Bloomquist and Lisbeth Salander. They’d just reconciled at the end of Larsen’s third book, and we’ll never get to know what he intended to happen between them in future novels.
I also saw the Swedish trilogy in the theater first. I thought Mara even though in the opening shot of her she looked totally odd I thought she had a compelling sexiness about her, but in the remake the same character just repulsed me…. nothing about her I found believable. The original starkness of the environment was an external representation of the bleakness within the characters and the lives they led. When I lived in NYC there was a theater that only showed newly released foreign films with subtitles, I have not seen a theater like that anywhere else, which is to bad.
There shouldn’t be any comparison since Fincher’s version was a psychological thriller while the Swedish version was not. This is like comparing Apples with Oranges. Fincher likes to mess up with audience’s mind and creates it more engaging through his excellent Sound Design, background score & choice of colours of his films. I watched this movie a few days ago and it felt like I was perusal Gone Girl or Mindhunter (American TV series). Besides, if Swedish people think that 2009 version was more authentic then may be this movie was meant for international audience and Fincher knows his audience and what they look for when they watch his films.
This comparison is based on hindsight and is really unfair. David Fincher’s version would have never happened were it not for the original version. The original version is organic and visceral. It’s new and fresh. Fincher, having the benefit of hindsight was able to take the entire cinematic vision of the original and add his Hollywood budget and touches to it. We know Fincher is an innovative filmmaker but the comparison is totally unfair. However, if you had given Finchner the EXACT same budget and if you had forbidden Finchner from perusal the first film then, you could make a legitimate comparison to the two pictures. If you are being honest Fincher’s version is a copy of the original with a lot of window dressing allowed by its extreme budget. I prefer the original but still love Fincher’s vision as well.