I heard about this book repeatedly at Bouchercom last year, so I bought a copy. Finally got around to reading it a few weeks ago. While it has many virtues--the character of Lisbeth Salander is as well-drawn as any I can remember--and much of the core mystery is well done, I have no idea why this book has received such acclaim. What could be great scenes are summarized almost into non-fiction, things that could be summarized are too drawn out, a major clue is so convoluted in its discovery that it's laughable, and the final disposition of the killer is a cop out.

I appear to be swimming aganst the ride with this opinion. What am I missing? Or does this emperor have no clothes?

Views: 132

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Not just a journalist, but a journalist who gets laid a lot. They have to love that.
I've read all three books of the series: 'men who hate women' (or 'girl with the dragon tattoo' as you call it), 'the girl who played with fire' and 'the girl who kicked the hornet's nest' (which in original is called something like - the air castles that exploded). I find the trilogy great. Mind you, it is a trilogy, 'the girl with a dragon tattoo' is not a stand alone book, everything that happened in that one has some effect in the other two.
I think the book got a lot of attention because of its main character, that is not Blomkvist, but Salander who is not your regular everyday-type character AND because it's quite modern actually when you look at it. There's hackers and stuff like that. I've read a lot of modern books but none of them relied on technology as much as this one has. And here I speak of whole trilogy.

The sequel to 'tattoo', 'the girl who played with fire' is in my opinion better than the first book, and it deals quite a lot with salander's past which is more than interesting, and explains a lot about her and her actions in the previous (and the next) book. It deals with a hunt for Salander as a prime suspect in murders of two journalists. The third book of the series is, well, the most passive... I can not think of better word to describe it, and I don't wish to give away any spoilers. But passive as it is, it's still interesting and it kept me reading. It was a direct sequel of the second book.... it started exactly where the second one ended. And btw, I found the ending satisfactory.

If you liked the first book and you liked salander you should read on.... than judge it. I understand that the books may be nothing special, but I personally liked them a lot. I don't know if the Millenium series got so much attention because of Larson's death, we will never know, will we? But I think Salander herself pulls quite a lot of attention to the series. For me it's the same thing that happened to the 'Dark Knight' movie. Was it so great because Heath Ledger had done a tremendous role and passed away? Would it be so big if he was still alive? We will never know. But you could still watch a whole movie and decide for yourself whether it is good or bad. And his role DID bring a spotlight to the movie. In a way, Salander brings a spotlight to this series.
I absolutely agree on the Salander character, but that did not save the book for me. There was too much that didn't work.
Hey guys,

Just wanted to let you all know that the Swedish movie adaptation of the book is coming to UK cinema's on March 12th 2010.

Its an incredible book and the film is said to be a very close adaptation.

For more info, including images, trailers and competitions check out - www.facebook.com/thegirlwiththedragontattoouk

It looks great!
This could be a set-up for one of those rare instances where the movie is better than the book. If the screenplay can keep things moving and on track, there's a great story there. Readers just had to wade through too much extraneous junk to get to it.
This book was the pick for our Sisters in Crime book discussion in December, and it generated a lot of discussion, as it has here. I'd say the discussion was much better than the book. Like Dana, I thought there was a lot to like, but I still don't understand what made it such a runaway hit.

I did find Salander intriguing, and at first I really liked her, but in the end, I found her characterization inconsistent and her ultimate lack of empathy offputting. I thought Blomqvist was generally likable, but not very substantial. I just write a blog post about the book on Murderous Musings: http://murderousmusings.blogspot.com/2009/12/girl-with-dragon-tatto....

Like I.J., I thought the violence against women was portrayed a little too lovingly. It felt odd, since Larsson seemed to sincerely be decrying it. One of the topics that came up in our SInC discussion was whether or not the writer has a moral responsibility to his/her readers, and if so, what that responsibility might be. I'm going to blog on that this coming Thursday.
I suppose part of it is the appeal of a dead author; remember CONFEDERACY OF DUNCES?

I think it's all about the character Salander. She is such a remarkable heroine; she's so brave and strong. The second book in the series is better, although the plotting is also convoluted. Can't wait for the third.


CrimeSpace Google Search

© 2024   Created by Daniel Hatadi.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service