Watch The Red-Band International Trailer For David Fincher's THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO

Founder and Editor; Toronto, Canada (@AnarchistTodd)
to Vote
Watch The Red-Band International Trailer For David Fincher's THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO
Well, hello David. It's nice to have you back and feeling surly again. And to everyone out there who ever questioned the value of David Fincher tackling Stieg Larsson's The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo so soon after the hugely successful Swedish take on the material, I do believe the director has just replied with a hearty "Fuck off, I'll do whatever I like."

The US trailer for Fincher's latest is due online this week but viewers in Europe have been getting an eyeful of late with a hard edged red-band version of the trailer screening in theaters there. I'd assume that's going to turn up officially sometime shortly after the US version has hit screens but someone didn't want to wait that long.

Yes, it's a cam job - which we normally don't run here - but with the official version coming at some point yet to be determined and this looking so bloody good, we're running with it. Fincher, frankly, hasn't been this angry on screen for a very long time and it looks good on him. And I think this will put to rest many concerns about Rooney Mara's suitability for the role made famous by Noomi Rapace.

And, oh yes, the music. Yeah, that's a Led Zeppelin cover. By Trent Reznor. With Karen O singing. Can we just go ahead and make that a permanent band, please?
to Vote
Screen Anarchy logo
Do you feel this content is inappropriate or infringes upon your rights? Click here to report it, or see our DMCA policy.

More from Around the Web

via Slash Film
krakarMay 28, 2011 10:00 PM

Wow that is one hell of a trailer! Is that Reznor doing Zeppelin? Anyway what a great mix of sound and vision. Have to say this version looks quite superior to the previous one, very well made. The nordic version had great elements but wasn't put together that well. Hollywood production really is something else, and I wonder if Fincher has made a film even better than his last one here. But I really have my doubts the the new actress has half the charisma of the first Lisbet Salander..

Joshua ChaplinskyMay 29, 2011 12:52 AM

Sweet Jeebus, that's good.

brbro4May 29, 2011 1:23 AM

That's quite a teaser trailer. Anyone who hasn't seen the Millennium Trilogy already probably just got mindfucked after watching this. I don't think I've ever seen a trailer that advertised a film as a "feel bad movie". That's pretty bold.

JimMay 29, 2011 6:30 AM

Amazing what a great teaser can do. I've gone from ignoring this in my remake snobbery contempt to willing down the days to it's release. Appetite well and truly whetted.

ULTIMOMay 29, 2011 4:04 PM

And all because american's can't be bothered to read. pathetic.

brbro4May 29, 2011 4:29 PM

For the most part I dig the original films but you have to admit there's room for improvement.

zetobeltMay 29, 2011 7:49 PM

Well, we have just another remake. So what?

jwalk415May 29, 2011 10:13 PM

The tagline at the end is laughable. "She's coming"???? Uh, she already came...TWO FUCKING YEARS AGO, DIPSHITS!!!! Another fucking pointless remake. This will never end, I realize that but it's unfortunate. And as a HUGE Fincher fan, I'm disappointed he had to sink this low to this level. He's better than this crap...much better. That said, I'm such a fan of his, I'm going to check this out, nonetheless. I mean, as good as it could be, it will never change from the fact that remakes of already good films is POINTLESS. Ok, yeah, it's a "re-interpretation" of the original novels...I'll believe that when I see it but I'd rather have seen Fincher given the money to pursue another project. Let me add, it should surprise no one that Todd is all over this one, continuing his immense love of US remakes of already good foreign films even before he's seen them. And yes, that makes me a hater of US remakes of good films and I don't see that shameful in the slightest.

skinnyboy23May 29, 2011 10:17 PM

Not a remake. It is a new take on the source material (the book) and even from the quick cut in that trailer I can already see scenes that where only mentioned in the Swedish film that are being brought to life. I know I will get shit for this but this is much a remake as Let Me In was a remake, you know you CAN have more then one movie based off the same novel.

jwalk415May 29, 2011 10:32 PM

Yeah, I see what you're sayiing but I'm not buying it. I felt Let Me In was incredibly overrated and it's differences to Let the Right One In weren't as substantial as a few reviewers led people to believe. It was also a little watered-down. All this I see happening in this "new take on the source material". Again, I'm going to check this out, but in shame because I've always been staunchly against US remakes of good foreign films. Fincher is a great filmmaker so I'm sure it will at least be technically spectacular. It's just that there's no point to it, other than to make money and make the US audience even more oblivious to the previous work. I know several people who have seen Let Me In and had no idea of Let the Right One In and then scoffed when I told them the latter is Swedish. It's too bad that will also happen once this new remake is released.

thoughtatworkMay 30, 2011 1:12 AM

well, it is clear that this is only being made because it is going to make a SHITLOAD OF MONEY.

SwarezMay 30, 2011 5:30 AM

And what studio movie isn't? 30, 2011 7:22 AM

Why do I have the uncanny feeling that everyone who's getting so angry at remakes on some level employs the same kind of thinking as those right-wing, nationalist or religious idiots? As if something sacred of yours has been tarnished... Man, if you could just realize how horribly deluded you are, and how stupid you sound...

RoachgoddMay 30, 2011 9:36 AM

Remember kids, never hold anything sacred. That way we can all be neutral, insipid, arrogant emotional cripples who lounge about with our martinis, with no subject of conversation other than how silly other people are...

...but the trailer looks cool, and new Fincher is always good news.

claus von bulowMay 30, 2011 11:36 AM

You new you'd get shit for it, and yeah this is alarmingly stupid. Sure, it's another take on the book, that doesn't mean it's not a remake, lol. Both Let Me In and this one exists as a direct result of the success of their European counterpart - if it weren't for Let the Right One In having been made and been successful there would very likely be NO takes on the source material. Do you see what I'm getting at?

claus von bulowMay 30, 2011 11:53 AM

Yeah get a brain, morans - fuck this subtitled for'in crap.

LOL your post sounds a lot like typical right-wing internet tough guy post.

The ones who should be offended by the remakes are Americans themselves, not Europeans or Asians or wherever-the-film-be-from. Something that has been successful all over the world and is not a film for small children should not need to be remade for the US audience to "get it".

brbro4May 30, 2011 12:08 PM

Why's everyone so mad? The originals are far from perfect and the lack of faith in David Fincher is surprising. This IS the same guy that turned a movie about facebook (of all things) into one of the best films of the year. 30, 2011 12:23 PM

OK, let's see. I'm an European myself, I have seen and loved the originals of all the discussed movies in this thread and I have no problem with somebody making remakes and putting their talent to the test. Also, I don't see how a work of modern or ancient art can be sacred or hold the kind of value that essentially forbids others to imitate it be it for financial, personal or whatever else reasons. We live in the 21st century, information wants to be free and people like you get in its way. Humans are imitators by their very nature, this is how we build our society and how we spread its culture. You may not like it, but that's just the way it is.
What I meant with my previous comparison is that the originality of an art piece is no different in its "pureness" than the nationality of someone, which in case you don't know, is also imaginary and inexistent. Hence the tendency of some to behave aggressively in defending that inexistent property of the art piece in question is what makes them comparable to the aforementioned right-wing morons, i.e. deluded & stupid...

Todd BrownMay 30, 2011 12:40 PM

Remember, kids, all European movies are altruistic acts of charity. Only America makes movies to make money. 30, 2011 12:51 PM

That is the absolute truth! I remember seeing Taxi 3 a few years ago - man, so much altruism and charity involved, I almost had tears in my eyes by the end of it... :)))

Ryland AldrichMay 30, 2011 1:23 PM

Looking pretty clear now that this "cam job" is part of Sony's campaign. Well done. Can't wait for the movie - regardless of if the source material is a book or a movie, if the film is good then count me in. And wow that song is ridiculously good. As a huge NIN fan, Trent disbanding NIN might have been his most brilliant move ever.

VikarMay 30, 2011 5:21 PM

i've read the books. i've watched the 3 films. so i know what i'm talking about.
i loved the books, the first film was just ok and the other 2 were a huge piece of shit, good for tv at the most, with no rythm at all if comapred to the books. there's room for improvement, even in the first film, the original left out a good portion of the final part of the book that is shown in a 2 minutes sequence.
david fincher is a great director, one of the few worth watching from US nowadays. i hate remakes, but this one looks promising. let's give him a chance then we'll talk...

Todd BrownMay 30, 2011 7:35 PM

Morans? Is Dylan here somewhere?

claus von bulowMay 30, 2011 8:19 PM

Yeah these shadowy non-relativist creatures that hate information and therefore spend all their time "getting in its way". I mean, are you even serious?

Some people just think Hollywood remakes are pointless at best and horribly neutered versions of the original material at worst. And then they say so (if there's a point to saying so can be discussed, but people like to express themselves, as I'm sure you know). And that's pretty much that. Why are you complicating the matter so? I can only speak for myself, but I'm perfectly fine with you being perfectly fine with remakes - I could do without the whole U PPL R DELUDED AND STUPID CANT YOU SEE-schtick, though.

claus von bulowMay 30, 2011 8:31 PM

To be clear, I don't really care if shit gets remade, I think it's mostly pointless but whatever - I'm just wasting time here because I can't sleep and I'm apparently in an internet-is-serious-business-mindset today. You need not convert me.

And yes, this one might actually turn out better than the originals, well, at least it should turn out better than the second and third.

claus von bulowMay 30, 2011 8:37 PM

If I didn't like A Film With Me In It, should I still check out Black Books? Or anything with him in it?

Todd BrownMay 30, 2011 10:13 PM

Did you like Dylan in A Film With Me In It? Because that's pretty much his character - with some variations - in all of his major stuff. I personally find Black Books a bit sitcom but the good episodes are pretty great. His best work is How Do You Want Me.

claus von bulowMay 30, 2011 11:14 PM

I dunno, I probably wasn't amazed with him - the film was clever enough iirc, but just not that funny, to me. Will give How Do You Want Me a shot anyway, thanks for the suggestion!

Greg ChristieMay 30, 2011 11:30 PM

FLAME WAR! How's this? The whole Mellenium trilogy are probably 3 of the most over-rated books of the last decade although I think most agree that Hornet"s Nest was complete dreck and very obviously ghostwritten after Larsson passed away and edited by a drunk chimp. Steig was a decent journalist and his well reseached insights within the political realm are solid and Lisbeth is a kickass character and all. But the entire murder mystery that fuels the first book/film is cliche, boring, and simply not engaging at all. The entire pacing and structure of the book/original film were way off. The books were entertaining enough that I read through them all, but I've been completely dumbfounded for the last 5 years why so many people cherish this so much. Characters sitting around with laptops googling shit isn't fun to read about nor was it cinematic to watch in the original film. And for books about mysogny, everything about Mikeal is totally sexist as the perfect man who Larsson based on himself. Pffft, yeah no ego at all. Also, the original film cut out so many important aspects it failed in even giving any motive for any of the characters to do anything that they did. There was no reason for Mikael to take on the investigative job in the the original film, there was little reason or Lisbeth to follow Mikael. And the whole thing was horribly dependent on goofy montages in leiu of actual plot progression. This is a terrific trailer and I wish it was for another film, not because I'm angered that it's a remake, but because I already know the story and the answer to the convoluted and simply silly murder mystery. Frankly, it's boring and not far off from any other aiport paperback. I wish they could just skip this film and go straight to The Girl Who Played with Fire since it's the best book and had the worst adaptation so far.

Agent WaxMay 31, 2011 3:31 AM

Your post is the most deluded one on this page. Trying to tie in freedom of information with a movie remake now? Ooookkkaaayyy...
Your entire post basically just boils down to "Nothing is sacred to me, so nobody else in the world is entitled to hold anything sacred", and we are supposed to accept that this is somehow more valid than despising quick-buck remakes?

I don't disagree that humans like to imitate, or that no one vision is more valid or 'pure' than another, but I object to unnecessary remakes that water-down or snatch the spotlight away from a previous, recent film. If this film was remade 5-10 years from the Swedish version, I'd not have much to object to. Whatever else you may seek to call it, whatever fancy term you may wish to use, it is still an English-language remake of a successful 2-year-old Swedish-language film based on a Swedish novel, targeted primarily at American audiences, and there are unfortunate connotations that come with that status. You may not like it, but that's just the way it is.

And for the record, if you think 'nationality' is a nonexistent concept, I'm sure the Immigration departments/ministries of all countries in the world would like to have a word.

Ard VijnMay 31, 2011 7:43 AM

"Airport paperback" is a fine description for the books. They read away fine at a great pace but storywise they are indeed as pedestrian as, say, "The Da Vinci Code". That was another book I went into after a great many deal of recommendations, to discover it was about ten times more pulpy than I expected.

Joshua ChaplinskyMay 31, 2011 10:42 AM

I agree. The books were good for mass market fiction and the Swedish films were ok. It has nothing to do with subtitles or stupid, lazy Americans. Fincher is a craftsman and will make a superior product.

It's already been stated that they changed the end of the film, which, in my opinion, is where the book and the original adaptation were lacking. So this isn't just some retread. It (will be) an improvement.

Joshua ChaplinskyMay 31, 2011 10:43 AM


Joshua ChaplinskyMay 31, 2011 10:45 AM

Haha. Edited by a drunk chimp. 31, 2011 11:03 AM

Nope, this is not at all what my post "boils down to". Let me spell it out again - there is nothing in any product of art that can justify hateful behaviour towards those who want to imitate it for whatever reason they may have, or those who may want to witness that imitation. If one perceives that there is in fact such a thing, then I qualify that person as "deluded", which is just a diagnostic statement and not supposed to be offensive, unlike "sounding stupid", which however is my subjective opinion and hence the word "sounding" being used. The "right-wing morons" were used to draw a parallel, which was obviously misinterpreted, but anyway...
Remaking movies or adapting work from one form to another is indeed one of the many ways information enjoys its freedom. On that level remaking "The Girl" after two years is no different than the recent documentary by Werner Herzog about the Chauvet caves. I don't see what is sacred about "spotlight" or money earnings. This is not science, where the necessity for original thought matters for the final outcome - you're talking about human vanity and media frenzy and placing your belief in some "true" value in them.
And as for the nationality being an imaginary concept, this is not my idea - it happens to be one of the most important works on that and related topics:
The immigration departments have nothing to do with this - they're just performing their duty, much like the officers in Nazi concentration camps. Whether you consider either of these activities to be "right" or "wrong" depends mostly on the side of the fence you find yourself at and the amount of trouble you're having there ;)

Todd BrownMay 31, 2011 11:47 AM

How Do You Want Me is pretty great. It's also the least comedy thing he's ever done, which is surprising considering that Mark Heap (Spaced) and Peter Serafinowicz (Spaced, Running Wilde) are both regulars in it as well.

Greg RiveraMay 31, 2011 5:41 PM

Wow, this thread has actually become a philosophical debate! Far out!
Variety, people. The Spice of Life, it is.

Ard VijnMay 31, 2011 8:41 PM

"Variety, people. The Spice of Life, it is."

One of the reasons people hate remakes, perhaps?

Greg RiveraMay 31, 2011 11:10 PM

I just don't get all the hate that fuels the passionate responses of the naysayers. If the remake is badly made, those who love the original can say "I told you so". If the remake is well done — not that many naysayers would ever admit that it is — it might just bring more attention to the original that inspired the remake (or updated adaptation). But either way, exactly how does a remake ruin the movie that came before it?