Post: #1

This is a very brief review of the third and final book in the Millineum trillogy, otherwise known as "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" series. Although I do hate disclaimers, I must say for our normally non-fiction readers out there, I am usually not into fantasy or fiction either, but these books are by far and away the exception to the rule.

The novels are written by a Swedish journalist, among other occupations, named Stieg Larson, who unfortunately died about 2 weeks after finishing the series of a heart attack.

I am solely reviewing the one translated to English. I have not read nor do I have much information regarding the Swedish versions.

First off, none of the context or what makes the third book so enthralling could be caught simply by reading "The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets Nest",
you must read the first one, "Girl with the Dragon Tattoo", then the second, "The Girl Who Played with Fire". Everything I write about the third is in the context of already having read the first two.

There will be no public spoilers. From me but please also not as replies either.

The book picks off right where it stops from the second, literally not skipping a beat. Those of you who have read the second book understand that nasty cliffhanger we were left with, and Larson wastes NO TIME in putting you back in the moment.

His writting is superb, he is detailed, but also doesnt sit around wasting words to sound like hes a good writter, if that makes sense to anyone. Most of the actual content of the third book is going to have to be a take-your-word-for-it type of situation, because there are so many surprises and so much going on I dont want to ruin it for you guys.

I read the book in about 3 days and barely slept. I was completely taken by it. Although it is fiction, there are explinations for everything and nothing happening that makes you strach your head and think "That could never happen!" which is my biggest problem with most fiction writting.

Anyway, I get this is lacking in content, but moral of the story is read this fucking series already!

Post: #2

(11-30-2014 10:52 AM)sylo Wrote:  Anyway, I get this is lacking in content, but moral of the story is read this fucking series already!

No. Because it's typical marxist-feminist blue pill pop culture horseshit. And the movies too.

Post: #3

I liked the girl with the dragon tattoo the best.

And I thought it was mixed red-blue (green pill?) . A large part of the blue pill section was necessary for the story imo.
Definitely did not find it horse shit.

Post: #4

(11-30-2014 06:16 PM)Sharkie Wrote:  And I thought it was mixed red-blue (green pill?) . A large part of the blue pill section was necessary for the story imo.
Definitely did not find it horse shit.

Stieg Larson was a ( both self-described) Trotskyite and male feminist who was an editor for a far-left SJW Communist newspaper in Sweden.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo series is based on his experiences being a journalist with said Communist paper-- model for the Millenium newspaper in the series-- while obviously also using in the storyline both his sexual and non-sexual fantasies of young, strong independent women displaying dominance.

The book drips with left wing horseshit, from the riot grrl protagonist to the bad mouthing of the Swedish right, Capitalism in general, masculinity, opposition to third-world immigration, and more. The good guys are valiant and progressive equalists and the bad guys are terrible racist, misogynist, psychopathic right-wingers who oppose them and-- according to Larson in his marxist delerium-- infest the Swedish public and private system.

Larson was an able writer. It's just that he was also just another cliche- spewing SJW who would happily see red pill men thrown in jail or fired for resisting his ideology. I don't know about you, but I don't support that.

Post: #5

Quit whinning politics. You think a Scientist should have complete and unsupervised control over young children, particularly girls? Why should there be no over sight? I am assuming you also have a problem with Larson's view that clandestine, answer-to-no-one secret secs of government should continue to run a mafia like regime? Where corruption is unseen, becuase since it is the government, it is ok?

I guess the only sort of books we should be reading are books where there is one masculine character who is all-knowing and correct about everything, while ony introducing women as terrible, stupid sluts who have literally only done the worst things immaginable ever, and any sort of conservative or right wing male or organization shall only be viewed as benevolent.

What an uneducated, lacking waste you are to this thread.

Post: #6

(12-01-2014 07:42 AM)sylo Wrote:  Quit whinning politics. You think a Scientist should have complete and unsupervised control over young children, particularly girls? Why should there be no over sight? I am assuming you also have a problem with Larson's view that clandestine, answer-to-no-one secret secs of government should continue to run a mafia like regime? Where corruption is unseen, becuase since it is the government, it is ok?

I guess the only sort of books we should be reading are books where there is one masculine character who is all-knowing and correct about everything, while ony introducing women as terrible, stupid sluts who have literally only done the worst things immaginable ever, and any sort of conservative or right wing male or organization shall only be viewed as benevolent.

What an uneducated, lacking waste you are to this thread.

So...lemme get this straight. I politely disagree with you, state my reasons why I don't like the book, don't attack you in the process, and then you turn around and like a butthurt woman or beta male start throwing around insults because someone dared to disagree. BTW you are the one whining here. Uneducated? Masculine shaming? Typical SJW knee-jerk insults there. Gonna accuse me of having a small dick, living in my parents basement, or being a closet homosexual too?

Sure you're on the right forum? Jezebel might be more to your liking.

Post: #7

This is a book review. By the sounds of it, you havent even read the book. You mention the author's personal beliefs as to why the book MUST be terrible. I am willing to bet you have never met him nor had a personal conversation with him to determine what his views are; which is an irrelevant matter since he is writting a work of fiction.

I expressed my agitation in your efforts to de-rail my thread effectively. You are trying to be a bully. It is not quite working.

Post: #8

(11-30-2014 06:48 PM)Germanicus Wrote:  

(11-30-2014 06:16 PM)Sharkie Wrote:  And I thought it was mixed red-blue (green pill?) . A large part of the blue pill section was necessary for the story imo.
Definitely did not find it horse shit.

Stieg Larson was a ( both self-described) Trotskyite and male feminist who was an editor for a far-left SJW Communist newspaper in Sweden.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo series is based on his experiences being a journalist with said Communist paper-- model for the Millenium newspaper in the series-- while obviously also using in the storyline both his sexual and non-sexual fantasies of young, strong independent women displaying dominance.

The book drips with left wing horseshit, from the riot grrl protagonist to the bad mouthing of the Swedish right, Capitalism in general, masculinity, opposition to third-world immigration, and more. The good guys are valiant and progressive equalists and the bad guys are terrible racist, misogynist, psychopathic right-wingers who oppose them and-- according to Larson in his marxist delerium-- infest the Swedish public and private system.

Larson was an able writer. It's just that he was also just another cliche- spewing SJW who would happily see red pill men thrown in jail or fired for resisting his ideology. I don't know about you, but I don't support that.

Perhaps you're right, I read it a long time ago. There were definitely strong elements of blue pill in the book, as noted earlier.
Obviously I do not support those views either.

Take back the assessment of the author, however I still recommend the book. One reason why people read is to get exposed to different ideas, whether one agrees with those ideas or not. Keeping that in mind, it was a thoroughly enjoyable read his own personal philosophy notwithstanding.

Post: #9

Hey Sharkie, I am glad you are a fan of this series, and since I have read them on the road and have not really been around people who are familiar with it, how welcoming it is you've commented.

You mentioned red pill (I truely despise that phrase)...and what I found refreshing, is that the heroine is not some feminist, in your face, masculine prescence. It is the contrary. She is an extremely small, (physically) meek, quiet woman. The book literally explains how she is principled, and profoundly logical in her assesments and conclusions. She is smart and only speaks when there is something necessary to say.

Combined with Blumkvist, they make a quite realistic, and 'redpil' combination. Actually, now that I think about it, Blumkvist is a very pedril character. He fucks multiple women and never fucking ever makes excuses or explains his behavior.

If there is a bias against this series for being ruebil, it is most unfounded and I pity the people who will never enjoy it's sheer talent or joy.

Post: #10

I am a fan of the series and "The Girl who Played with Fire" is my favourite.
Yeah is not the most redpill thing to like fiction with a female protagonist but I love Lisbeth Salander, does that make me beta?

Post: #11

Why the fuck does red pill mean that there can not be an identifiable, female character as the protag?

I really need to be conditioned as to which information I accept as a forum member, and how to propigate the forum with such approved cumslop.