Live From New York, It’s Jean Dujardin On … 
R.I.P. Whitney Houston 
TOLDJA! Indomina-BET Buy Sundance ‘LUV’ 
Midnight Madness For ‘Breaking Dawn’ DVD 
RECORD WEEKEND! ‘The Vow’ Beats ‘Safe … 
Saoirse Ronan Bigger Teen Action Queen 
WME Signs Writer-Director Jon Kasdan 
‘Glee’s Jane Lynch Joins Indie Film Comedy 
Universal Revives ‘Dracula Year Zero’ With … 
Jodie Foster Sending Mel Gibson Film ‘The … 
‘Roseanne’ Reunion: John Goodman To Co-Star In … 
UPDATE: Closing Arguments Conclude In Golden Globes Trial; … 
Series Adaptation Of ‘Legion’ With … 
Lionsgate Calms Investors With Talk About Charlie Sheen, … 
Ridley Scott Commits To Next Direct McCarthy’s … 
Benderspink, Arcana Launch Film-Friendly Comics Line 
Marvel Studio’s Tim Connors Defects To Legendary As … 
UPDATE: Warner Bros Lawyers Dig In Garbage Over ‘The … 
Upstart Shingle Radius Acquires Redo Rights To Nic … 
EXCLUSIVE: Summit’s Erik Feig To Be Named President … 
Central Casting Taking Sides In SAG-AFTRA 
EXCLUSIVE… UPDATE: The plot is thickening on the David Fincher-directed adaptation of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, the internationally hot Stieg Larsson mystery novel. Of course, with the Swedish film version having made $100+M worldwide so far this year, many quarters are predicting that Sony Pictures will screw up the Hollywood version. Today, the studio set a December 21, 2011 release date for the film — even though the two leads are not locked in. The studio continues talking with Daniel Craig to play publisher Mikael Blomkvist, but sources tell me there’s a scheduling problem for him involving the long delayed next Bond pic and Cowboys & Aliens.
The studio is also signing test deals with a group of young actresses dying to play the complex role of Lisbeth Salander. While Carey Mulligan, Ellen Page, and Mia Wasikowska (Alice in Wonderland) have been mentioned as possible Lisbeth candidates, I’m told others include Emily Browning (Sucker Punch), Sara Snook (Sleeping Beauty), Rooney Mara (The Social Network) and Sophie Lowe (Blame). Some have submitted their own tapes to director David Fincher already, while others will test shortly for the role. It’s a process similar to the one Sony orchestrated before choosing Andrew Garfield to play Spider-Man. Meanwhile, I hear Fincher is telling actresses to working on their Swedish accents, which indicates the novel may not Americanized. The book was adapted by Steve Zaillian and is being produced by Scott Rudin, who just worked with Fincher on The Social Network, also for Sony Pictures.
Loading ...
i love how the casting is like spiderman, except with no baggage. ellen page all the way!!
I like Ellen Page, but I can’t picture her as Lisbeth Salander. Hard Candy notwithstanding, I think she’s just too cute for this role.
Like I said, I like her, but I just don’t see her in this particular role.
It’s called acting and that young woman would scare the crap out of you, if she wanted to.
“It’s called acting?” What a smarmy reply. I just expressed my opinion about an actress and a role without even trashing her.
You talk to people like that in real life?
I would wait to see Ellen in James Gunn’s new movie “Super” before passing judgement on her.
STOP MESSING UP GREAT FILMS!
Absolubtely no need to remake this film.. Its great as it is.
David FIncher, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE Give it up !
I agree. I have already seen this movie and it was great. I do not understand why you are wasting a lot of money remaking something that will be a let down after seeing the original.
No,no. Rooney Mara all the way.She has the skills, the allure, and strength to pull of the role and make it her own or just as powerful as the original actress. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1913734/
One young actress had a box office total of 3 billion dollars in ’09, yet I don’t see her name being mentioned for Dragon. She’s tough, athletic and would make a terrific Lisbeth Salandar. Her name is Zoe Saldana; maybe you’ve heard of her.
Or Sony could really be daring and cast Pink, who might make a very interesting Lisbeth.
So could Michelle Rodriguez, Dichen Lachman or Keisha-Castle Hughes. An American remake means casting a believable urban girl with a criminal background; you’re not going to find an actress like that mincing around in a BBC costume drama.
Jessica Alba would be a great choice!!!!
I don’t understand why an American version has to be made? the Swedish version stands it’s ground, it’s solid and well made. aren’t there enough books out there to make movies out of? out of respect for the books I hope this doesn’t become road kill.
I agree. Look what happened with the Dutch film The Vanishing, a wonderful film. Because it was a big success, the American film industry had to create their own version, an awful film with Keifer Sutherland and Jeff Bridges (and Sandra Bullock in a small role) that had to add a happy ending, rather than the dark and better original version.
Fincher will have WAY more creative control with this remake than Sluizer had with his.
Hey, film snobs,
If you guys really don’t understand why they’re making this, then i sincerely hope you aren’t trying to make a living in the entertainment business. Seriously Oscar Bait + huge worldwide gross potential = home run. Seriously– get over yourselves and crack open that pizza box sitting on the floor of your USC dorm room.
Why are we just assuming Fincher’s going to make a bad movie? He’s obviously a great filmmaker, and maybe…. just MAYBE he’ll do the book justice (he doesn’t owe anything to the Sweedish version of the movie. Just the book).
Let’s just hold off the judgement until we see what happens.
And with that said, seeing as how she’s the sweetest girl in Hollywood… ELLEN PAGE!!!
HMMM… Home Runs in film making can best be served by remakes? Hollywood has been in free fall for too long now, because appropriation has taken over originality and creativity. BORRRRRERing!!!
I agree.
There´s enough material left out in the swedish film version of the book. (That goes for the whole swedish filmed version of the trilogy) If Fincher is going to make his film based on the book, that is why the Stieg Larsson and Yellow Bird give there approval. I´m quit confident they will make ANOTHER version, but great movie based on the books.
Stieg Larsson couldn’t possibly give his approval – he’s dead!
Because Americans are not Swedes. More to the point, Swedish movies are heavily subsidized by the Government and don’t make much money if at all. Think NEA grants on steroids for performance artists pouring chocolate syrup all over themselves.
If you want to make money, you have to have a point, an uplifting ending or audiences will stay away (and word of mouth will be poison).
I agree, the “Swedish version” is well-made, dark, glossy and entertaining. An American remake challenging the Swedes on their own turf might seem arrogant and unnecessary.
To a point, a model for this movie might be Chris Nolan’s INSOMNIA. It’s a solid remake of a Norwegian film of the same name. In fact, it seems to have inspired many elements of “Girl.” The Nolan film simply moved the locale to Alaska…
For an American “Girl,” the locale could be Seattle and the San Juan Islands. A Pacific Northwestern location would match the story and characters beat-for-beat. It’s a progressive political climate, every tenth woman in Seattle dresses like Salander and there are plenty of dour Swedes.
The Swedish version is a paint by numbers adaptation that can’t quite shake its small-screen roots. After seeing Girl with the Dragon Tattoo I swore off watching any of the other ones because I feel as though David Fincher’s version is almost guaranteed to be better. I see it as the difference between the Christopher Columbus Harry Potter movies and Alfonso Cuaron’s Prisoner of Azkaban. Visually the Swedish films are blah and we get nothing but a rote rehash of the books. I will admit that the girl who plays Lisbeth Salander is pretty good, but with every 20-something actress chomping at the bit to get this part, I feel as though Fincher will have his pick and he is usually pretty good with casting.
Just because something is in a foreign language doesn’t always mean its better or more intelligent than the American version is or will be. Europe makes a lot of crap films too, this one just snuck in because it was based on a wildly popular book.
Amen. I’m tired of people going on about the Swedish film as if it’s some unassailable masterpiece. It’s a highly professional genre film, done on a visbily limited budget by American standards.
I saw the books themselves best described as “the Swedish DaVinci Code”. They’re fun schlock, nothing more. I read and enjoyed all three, but I’d never mistake them for literature.
People keep treating the Swedish films as art just because they have subtitles. There’s room in the world for a remake by a truly gifted director and I’ll definitely go see it.
I thought the Swedish film was good but not a masterpiece. Fincher can improve on it. With the exception of Lisbeth and the Vangers, the casting wasn’t perfect.
The first book is probably the weakest of the series with over half of it being exposition and not particularly relevant to the series as a whole. It’s not until the last half that it becomes a page turner. The Swedish film handled the exposition and flashback sequences in a manner that integrated them into the main plot.
It also assumed that you have read the books because there were some minor, but important overall in the series, plot changes. Two male characters who are particularly important to Lisbeth are either reduced to a cameo appearance or omitted entirely. If you’ve never read the books, you’re not going to know who these characters are and why they are important.
i’d like browning or page for the role. if this was made ten years ago, michelle williams or christina ricci would be my candidates, definitely.
Having seen and been knocked out by the Swedish versions of Dragon Tattoo and Hair on Fire (with Hornets Nest due for release on October 15th), I don’t believe there’s anything the best of Hollywood could do to improve on the integrity and excitement of these home grown film versions of Larsson’s books.
It got poor reviews at the WSJ, where critics generally love all that kind of stuff (Joe Morgenstern lives/breathes/eat Dogma 95). The take was, basically a made for TV Swedish movie.
This movie is bound to fail because of the source material. Its not an international best-seller. That’s just hype Mike Fleming copy/pasted from the press release. Harry Potter, the Twilight Series, those are international best-seller series. This is … “Big in Sweden.” Yawn.
Audiences are not interested in female ass-kickers, far less tattooed, sexually abused, promiscuous ones. Female audiences want a hunky prince, sexy werewolf, or glittery gay vampire. They don’t want to kick ass, but to get it. The fat, middle aged, and passive male lead in the book series is a downer for them. For men, the female lead is good for a casual encounter, nothing more. She’s not a woman to risk crossing the street for, much less everything. The male lead character passive, victim nature is repellent to American male audiences as well.
No one would argue that Twilight is well written, or that it says anything new. But the tremendous response by female audiences and readers ought to tell Hollywood what works for them. Same for stuff like Iron Man.
More to the point, as movies evolve into nothing more than giant commercials for merchandise, I don’t see it. Its a lot of fuss for Oscar bait that will do about as much business as the Reader, and be utterly forgotten the year after its made.
Two questions for Whiskey:
1) If “audiences are not interested in female ass-kickers,” then I suppose Salt won’t make a dime this weekend. Right-o, moron. Judging by the box office numbers of Wanted, Lara Croft, etc., it’s far to say that audiences ARE interested in female ass-kickers. Got any other untenable opinions you’d like me to debunk?
2) Why are you so hateful? Racism, misogyny, homophobia, xenophobia, and anti-Semitism are the centerpieces of each and every one of your posts. Are you able to process anything without referring to your myopic world view?
Whiskey longs for the days when women were barefoot and pregnant, blacks knew their place, and gays stayed in closet. Guess what, Whiskey? Those days are over and they’re not coming back. It’s the 21st century; buy a calendar and try to keep up.
You and your ilk are dinosaurs. And just like the dinosaurs, you’ve got two choices: adapt or perish. I’m expecting the latter, since I don’t think you have in you to pull off the former.
The minority is now the majority; those who share your opinions are getting smaller and smaller by the day. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Finally, here’s a question for Nikki: why do you allow this jackass a platform to spew his noxious views? Whiskey has his own blog; he can poison the discourse there.
Arch Nemesis: Come on now … you’ve heard of freedom of speech, right. Just because NK censors and edits material on this blog written ABOUT her, you think she has the integrity to do the same about others … NOT!
Whiskey can have all the free speech he wants…at his own blog. Deadline is a privately owned website; Nikki and MMC are under no obligation to host Whiskey’s offensive (and at this point, tiresome) screeds.
Whiskey will probably turn out to be a 17-year-old in his parent’s rec room. Go back to excessive masturbation. W. Write us when you get good at it.
I completely understand wanting to rebut Whiskey’s idiocy, but seriously: he is the definition of an Internet troll. The only winning move is not to play. If people stopped responding, his homophobic, misogynist ass would stop writing (or at least limit himself to Drudge).
Judging by the sheer volume of Whiskey’s posts, I would guess he doesn’t have a job or was fired (maybe by a woman). His irrational anger at women is interesting and I wonder what caused it. I think it goes beyond the dinosaur mentality, which is a bias based on a man’s belief in his gender’s superiority. This is actual hatred. Maybe we’ll see this guy on the evening news one night.
Whiskey: Ever heard of creative or artistic license?!
Joe Morgenstern of the WSJ is the most honest reviewer alive today. Check out his reviews over the last two months. He slams, rightfully so, several indies that got high praise but where actually glorified student films. Go ahead. Read his reviews. He pulls no bunches, kisses no assess.
Thank you.
You are spot on about this..ignore the haters.
whiskey…
how ’bout you let women decide what women want? i can tell you that this women doesn’t want someone as narrow minded and ill-informed as you making decisions about which movies should be made. what should be an entertaining discussion about who should be playing lisbeth salander took an ugly turn when you sat down to type.
now let the adults have an informed conversation and go away.
gawd people need to get over hollywood and remakes. it’s an old bit we’ve all groaned about. get over it.
Yolandi Visser as Lisbeth!
Stupid americans need the dumbed down version of an already perfectly fine, well made and great movie. The rest of the world can see it as it is and enjoy it, but we’re so dumb, so ignorant and self-absorbed that we need for hollywood to make the dumbed down for americans version. Pathetic.
Jesus, man… you need a hug. Seriously– Craig’s List works wonders.
Teddy, you’ve posted two idiotic posts in the same forum. Why go after those who state the obvious – some foreign films stand on their own merit and don’t need to be Americanized. Unless you’re hoping to make a career of ripping off foreign films because you lack any creativity. Is that it? You’re so uncreative that the only way you can have a career is by doing remakes of already established foreign films?
Are you hoping to remake Pan’s Labyrinth? How about The Lives of Others? Why not rip-off Kurosawa and remake Ran?
If there is anybody who could use the services of Craigslist, it’s an uncreative and delusional person like yourself. Remember to tip.
I agree richard. Saw the Swedish film and all I could think when watching it was… “How is Hollywood gonna screw this up?” For those who haven’t seen the movie… do yourself a favor.
So we’ll get Swedes speaking English with an accent? Really?? Isn’t that an old film trope that we’ve done away with?
Secondly, while the European version is serviceable, how can you object to one of the five greatest filmmakers alive putting his stamp on the project?
Richard’s silly claim that it will be in anyway dumbed down, should preclude anyone from reading further.
I’ve seen the original.
It’s not a perfect piece of cinema. It’s bold, but it’s not directed well.
The first 30-40 minutes of the original are meandering and in desperate need of a better filmmaker. The film takes way too long to get Mikael and Lisbeth in the same room.
Fincher should crush this.
That said, there is a fundamental problem with this story. It’s essentially a mystery to solve the disappearance of a young woman 40 years ago. The problem with that is there is no sense of immediacy as to what Lisbeth and Mikael are solving/seeking.
The movie is good because the character of Lisbeth is raw, courageous and brilliant.
The plot needs work. There needs to be a ticking clock to make this work.
“The film takes way too long to get Mikael and Lisbeth in the same room.”
If you didn’t like how long the movie took, you should definitely avoid the book altogether.
If you don’t understand there’s a difference in telling a story in a novel and telling a story for film, I’ve got nothing else to say to you.
What’s with all the asshole replies on this topic. I was just saying that the book takes even longer than the movie.
Christ what a bunch of cranks.
“The original film takes way too long to get Mikael and Lisbeth in the same room.” OH BOY, if you didn’t like that, DON’T SEE THE 2nd MOVIE — Mikael and Lisbeth NEVER get together until the end (and you can bitch to the novelist about THAT).
What an ignorant remark.
With all due respect to the previous 2 posters, I have to agree with “a writer.:” The first two films in the trilogy are great films, but Fincher, Zaillian and co. will be sure to move the beginning at a better pace. It’s necessary: Zaillian was able to do it with AMERICAN GANGSTER (not saying that Sir R. Scott completed a great film). The Wenger family issue will probably boil somewhere in the b.g while we get to know the current state of our protagonist.
Why my previous posters are using the book as a way to critique makes no sense. It’s an adaptation of the book; no one expects the movie to move at the book’s pace – for any adaptation for that matter. There different species of media. I wonder if either of you write screenplays/scripts to speak with that tone/mindset.
Where I do agree is that, since this project is essentially a lock, and Amy Pascal said they’re gonna keep them at a HARD-R, they will definite want to move “faster” for (2nd) PLAYED WITH FIRE. The original felt like a bridge to the third upcoming movie, rather than a stand-alone. North American audiences won’t be that patient with this strong duo not see each other – let alone barely communicate – until the very end.
Granted should the first one knock it out the park.
hmm, which screenplay writing book did you read? ticking clock bs… come on
Clearly you know little about screenwriting and storytelling. You probably like meandering plots that go nowhere and think that’s art. Whatever.
When I first heard about The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo people were comparing it to Silence of the Lambs, which in my opinion, is a perfectly crafted thriller from start to finish.
Dragon Tattoo is not a perfectly crafted thriller.
What makes Silence work, besides the incredible performances, is that Clarice is trying to save someone’s life and the audience knows she’s running out of time.
In Dragon Tattoo, the mystery is some girl who disappeared 40 years ago and no one in her family, outside of an old uncle, seems too concerned with her disappearance. There’s no sense of urgency to solving the case. It takes away from the excitement and tension.
You want to defend the movie because you love the book then you come off as nothing more than a frothing fanboy/fangirl who can’t imagine a world where this story is told better and in a more economical fashion.
The first 30-40 minutes of the movie were at times excruciating. I literally almost gave up on it. All the backstory shoved in your face from the start of the film about the court case is meaningless to this story. We don’t need to see or meet his co-workers at the magazine. They have nothing to do with this plot.
As for you not loving the term “ticking clock” that just tells me you don’t work in Hollywood. You must be a frustrated writer who doesn’t understand the basics on how to make stories work. It has nothing to do with reading a screenwriting book. It’s about understanding your craft.
Dragon is not a great film. I think Fincher has his work cut out for him.
It has a brilliant character in Lisbeth, but the plot of the story is thick and dull at times.
The movie was a lot of hype in my opinion.
Oh, the “ticking clock” rears its ugly head once again. You must be a junior level development exec.
ellen page all the way for this!
No matter what they do it will never be as good as the Swedish originals. Americans should learn how to read subtitles.
I’m sorry, but I don’t think having subtitles makes a movie superior. It just causes people to go on endlessly about it so they can feel superior. The Swedish film is the work of highly skilled craftsmen, but I’m dying to see what one of the most gifted filmmakers alive does with the same material.
In Whiskey’s world there is no Angelina Jolie, no Salt, and The Matrix never existed.
Thank goodness I live in this one.
HOW is a book series only successful in Sweden able to produce a film that generates 100 million worldwide with unknown actors???
Maybe you’re not aware of the strength of the series and the reputation. Why else would America come knocking so soon when the first movie is still in many theatres. I personally will probably skip the remake because I thought the film captured the book pretty closely even if a lot had to be left out. And the girl who played Lisbeth did an excellent job in a very tough role. It’s for me the same with LET THE RIGHT ONE IN remake LET ME IN. So soon for an American remake that I will skip since the first version was done so well.
I don’t know why you think the book series is only successful in Sweden. On my Chicago commute the days following the release of “Fire” and “Hornet’s Nest” there was always 3 or 4 people reading the book
When the “Dragon Tattoo” film came out there were loads of people reading it on the train
After seeing Dragon and Girl, Sir Howard Stringer should stop this now. It would be one thing if the two versions had been made 5 years ago ok try a remake but now, the inmates have taken over the funny farm.
I don’t believe that many famous young US actresses are willing to star in “The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo”, because most of famous young US actresses refuse to do any nude scene in any movie.
(The original movie of “The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo” has a lot of nude scenes.)
As Goldman said: “Nobody knows anything.” So I won’t pretend that I do. That being said, I have the following observations:
1) The main competition is in directing the film…Niels Arden Oplev is well on his way to proving himself another “Chinatown” Roman Polanski. His direction made a grey story flamboyant without blowing up the mansion. Smash, bang, crash, FX IS getting trite.
2) The intensity of a four foot eleven sexy Noomi Rapace will be hard to match from our stable. But then, we like Lara Croft. Lizbeth is NOT a superhero…she is a closed in damaged woman with extraordinary mental talents and courage. That’s why mature women with emotional scars “cheer” in the theaters when she reacts against her abusers. Teen girls will NOT get that. Lisbeth is an “intellectual”. She is a European heroine…the new wave is back
3) The movie will be “changed”, that is certain. But like a good script, how many changes can you make before it bears no ressemblance to the intent of the WRITER, Stieg Larsson…an intellectual investigative reporter, political rebel, feminist, and social injustice crusader. Brad Pitt, whom I like in many roles, cannot play the low key passive, yet strong, role needed.
I am a former financial executive and I would not Produce this movie with profit in mind…it would have to be for art…and that movie, well done with the appropriate actors, can get an Oscar.
I have seen this movie three times to find a plot flaw, a badly directed moment,…, I can fing NONE. The current version is PERFECTLY executed movie making. THAT is the challenge.
Screenwriter and Eternal Student of the Art.
Great insights but I have to disagree on your last point.
I did love the film, the boldness in Lisbeth balanced by the patience of Mikhael. The epilogue went a wee bit too long for me. And there were some unnerving points that unraveled the whole thing for me at the getgo. SPOILER AHEAD…..!
“Of course the young Wanger ran away so let’s see why,” my mind said. Yet no one uttered this possibility. Old uncle Wenger hiring Mikhael “out of nowhere,” then accusing someone killed his niece and yet, somehow, kept up her flora gifts for his birthday was a bit ludricous for me; hidden by our interest in our protagonists.
Not having read the 1st book, I hope this is an inciting incident that can be strengthed/closed up.
PLEASE NOT Ellen Page! She would ruin the character. She was ok in Inception, but you can always tell when she’s acting.
Daniel Craig, on the other hand, would be perfect as Mikael Blomkvist.
They better not change the names of the characters like they did to Let the Right One In either.
Anyone saying the Swedish movie is any good needs their head examined, it is absolutely awful. They missed all the subtle pieces of brilliance that made the books so enjoyable. I as a fan of the books am really looking forward to Finchers version, the Swedish trilogy did not deliver in any way and were a HUGE disappointment.
I want to see what Fincher does with the story. Then I’ll something to say.
Fincher will knock this out of the park on a Wednesday, before lunch and w/ two hands tied behind his back!!! The first film was great. The 2nd and 3rd are like Lifetime Movie of the Week entries and need serious uplifts. Noomi and Michael are still great in the roles but the direction is quite poor, pacing and editing is atrocious and the books and Larsson deserve better. The series also ends as if they are getting a 4th etc. and that doesn’t look to be the case.
Angelina Jolie would be perfect as Lisbeth but alas is probably not interested or available. Ellen Page is a VERY, VERY limited actress who is closing in on her fifteen minutes any day now. No way does she get this role. Do any young American actress have the edge? I would rather see Anna Kendrick do it. I don’t know any Scandinavian actresses. Noomi says she won’t do it again even though her English is perfect for it. Has anyone asked her for a recommendation??
Yeah, there was an interview with her on buzzine.com where and she actually said she likes Ellen Page ’cause she saw her in Hard Candy. But she also said she thought that it should be an actress who’s not very well known, which i completely agree with cause when seeing the Swedish version and not knowing anything about Noomi it made it easier for me to believe her character being that i had no preconceived notions about how she would perform or what type of actress she was. Regardless, i think that Noomi captured Lisbeth perfectly. And i also think that the Swedish one was done so well, but it’s still exciting for me to think about what the American one could be and to see a different interpretation of it. If it sucks then that’s that but i mean it hasn’t even come out yet so lets give it a shot peeps!
I actually like the idea of Daniel Craig, but please not Ellen Page!! She is so overrated— plus, the thought of her in a love scene with Daniel Craig is just wrong.
I like Carey Mulligan, but I think they should just cast an unknown.
“Fincher will have WAY more creative control with this remake than Sluizer had with his.”
This is not necessarily a good thing.
“Angelina Jolie would be perfect as Lisbeth”
Maybe for the kicking-ass action scenes when the aliens land. As for the damaged waif who everyone underestimates, um, I think not.
The only person truly perfect for the role has already played it: Noomi Rapace, who’s made the part completely her own. Unfortunately Rapace wants to move on and is not interested in playing the character again. Sort of the decision Lisbeth Salander would make.
The bad news is that the American version may very well end up be a bloated big budget mess, and Rapace’s smart enough to want to distance herself from it.
The good news is that we’ll always have the Swedish version. And Noomi Rapace’s performance.
Wow, Sophie Lowe would be a great (if leftfield) choice. If you’re not familiar with her, check out Beautiful Kate (directed by Rachel Ward), in which she got her first major role in Australia. It’s an extraordinary performance in an extraordinary film. Actually the more I think of it, the more I think she’d be great as Salander.