The Millennium Series

[Dyno]

OK, SJ,com, I need some advice. I usually prefer to read non-fiction and often when I do read fiction that's really popular, I tend to not like it or be disappointed by it. A friend loaned me all three of the Millennium series books and I am torn about whether or not to read them. I've heard great things about the movie of "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" and I kind of want to see it. So I ask: Should I read the books? Should I see the movies? Should I read the books and then see the movies? Should I see the movies and then read the books? Help a sister out!

 

[qtlaw]

Loved the books. Fascinating reading. I prefer books over the movies (although the two I've seen are well done.)

 

[Buck]

I saw 'The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo' and 'The Girl Who Played with Fire' first and then read the books.
Both movies were good, and the books were quite. However, I would have enjoyed the books more had I not seen the movies first.
I read 'The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets Nest' last week (got it for Christmas) and really enjoyed it. We will be getting the movie via NetFlix soon.

 

[Small Town Guy]

A story in the New Yorker should help you decide if you want to read them. Presents its strong points and ridicules much of the writing.

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2011/01/10/110110crat_atlarge_acocella

 

[Buck]

" ... but what accounts for the success of the novels, despite their almost comical faults? Larsson may have had a weakness for extraneous detail, but at the same time, paradoxically, he is a very good storyteller. (Mario Vargas Llosa, in an article on the trilogy, compared Larsson to Dumas père.) As for cheap thrills, there’s dirt aplenty and considerable mayhem."

For a long piece that claims there's a msytery about the popularity of the novels, he seems to sum it up accurately and succinctly a little more than halfway through.

 

[HC]

Count me as a vote for the books. I enjoyed the movies because I was filling in a lot of missing details.

 

[Double Down]

Dyno, it depends on what your tastes are when it comes to literature.

The Larsson books are bad in many, many ways. Truly bad. The main character, a schlubby 50-something journalist who bears an uncanny resemblance to the now-deceased schlubby 50-something author, has beautiful women throw themselves at him at every turn. He is, despite not eve trying to win their affections, irresistible to them. They cannot stop their burning desire to **** him. It's as if Steig, in the final years of his life, imagined a life much more fascinating than his own, so he simply wrote one where he gets to solve crimes and have sex with everyone he meets, including his emo goth hottie partner-in-mystery-solving who is half his age.

However, the books are page turners. They are the potato chips of modern literature.

If you like the genre, but would prefer less bad writing (and less rape) try Dennis Lehane, George Pelecanos or Laura Lippman. They are vastly superior writers, but they still keep the pages humming, and you guessing on the plots, the way Larsson does.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Nice call on Lehane. Many an airline flight have flown by when I'm reading one of his books...

 

[Buck]

I'd have to go back and re-read, which I'm not going to do, but I don't recall anything in the books that indicate Blomquist was schlubby or 50-something.
That's the actor in the movies.
There is no indication as to why he has such success with women, but the character is in his 40s and, although not described as an Adonis, is described as good looking.
However, his powerful allure that causes women to literally throw themselves at him is ridiculous.

I don't usually read a lot of popular fiction, but I enjoyed these books, and I was never missled to believe that they represent great literature.
I read 'The Da Vinci Code' and enjoyed it. Different genre, of course, but I read it mostly because it became such a pop phenomenon. It didn't pretend to be a work of art, and I didn't understand the backlash against it.

As far as pop novels go, both Larrsen and Brown are at least devoid of the purple, overwrought passges with which King used to pepper his work.

 

[Dyno]

I don't usually read a lot of popular fiction, but I enjoyed these books, and I was never missled to believe that they represent great literature.
I read 'The Da Vinci Code' and enjoyed it. Different genre, of course, but I read it mostly because it became such a pop phenomenon. It didn't pretend to be a work of art, and I didn't understand the backlash against it.

I don't read much popular fiction either, but I read "The Da Vinci Code" and hated it. I, too, read it because it was such a pop phenomenon. That's how I'm feeling about these books. I wouldn't normally read them but I'm curious because they've turned into something bigger. I'm already figuring I'm going to be disappointed by them. I just wanted to get a take from people outside my little world. HC and I seem to have similar taste in books and she liked them, so there's that...

 

[HC]

It's not mind blowing stuff but I like the character of Lizbeth Salander. I'm also really interested in Swedish society since I started reading Mankell's Wallander series.

 

[Double Down]

As the New Yorker piece pointed out, it's hard to know just how much these books suffered during what was a rushed translation. There are sooooooo many pointless details and stilted dialog that could have easily been edited out improved the books.

But again, it's about expectations. I just think if the genre appeals to you, there are better options.

I think they're popular because there is a lot of sex and violence and violent sex in them, but also because the popularity of them became self-fulfilling. Everyone and their mother was reading them on airplanes, so I thought, ok, I'll give this a shot. It's marketed really well. The cover is eye-catching and the title is intriguing. There is no bloody way they'd be this popular if they had their Swedish title, "Men Who Hate Women."

 

[Buck]

That title sounds like a book about the N.Y. Jets.

 

[Piotr Rasputin]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Girl_with_the_Dragon_Tattoo_%282011_film%29

"George Clooney, Johnny Depp, and Brad Pitt were interested in playing the central role of Mikael Blomkvist, but Daniel Craig was in more serious talks for the lead in June."

This is like when the studio wanted Heath Ledger as Spider-Man, but Sam Raimi held out for Tobey Maguire. Apparently, no one held out for an actor who, you know, actually looks like the character. James Bond as schlubby guy.

Maybe my view is skewed by seeing the Swedish films?

 

[qtlaw]

By the time Hollywood gets around to actually start filiming, Ruffalo will be perfect.

 

[Double Down]

I'm actually more interested in the movies than I am reading the last 1.5 books. Fincher is directing them, I believe. Depending on your opinion of Benjamin Button, and whether he should be forced to own Alien 3, he hasn't missed yet.

 

[Jake_Taylor]

Dyno, I'm like you. Almost everything I read is non-fiction, but I gobbled up these books. There are some flaws, but the stories are entertaining. I also found myself really wanting to visit Sweden after reading them. I'm waiting on my wife to finish the third book so we can see the third movie.

 

[JR]

See the Swedish movies. The first one is pretty solid, the second one, not so much

 

[Jake_Taylor]

I also didn't get the impression from reading the books that he was supposed to be schlubby. Obviously he's the author's alter-ego, but I thought he was supposed to be the better looking, more successful, more adventurous alter-ego.

 

[Double Down]

I also didn't get the impression from reading the books that he was supposed to be schlubby. Obviously he's the author's alter-ego, but I thought he was supposed to be the better looking, more successful, more adventurous alter-ego.

Dude, in the first book he talks about how badly he needs to go running to get back in shape, then feels like he's about to pass out when he's running. Handsome, maybe. But plenty of spare tire there.